ICSID ad-hoc committee criticises approach to treaty interpretation

In Industria Nacional de Alimentos SA v Peru, ICSID Case no ARB 03/4, an ad hoc committee has rejected an application for annulment of an award pursuant to which the tribunal had determined that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the claimants' claims. The claimants argued that the award should be annulled on the grounds of manifest excess of powers, serious departure from a fundamental rule of procedure, and failure to state the reasons on which the award was based. These arguments were rejected by the ad hoc committee.

The decision is of interest largely because of the criticisms of the manner in which the tribunal stated its reasons: indeed, one member of the ad hoc committee published a dissenting opinion, containing trenchant criticisms of the tribunal's award. The decision contains some helpful guidance as to the standard of reasoning which parties to ICSID arbitrations are entitled to expect in relation to treaty interpretation, as well as interesting discussion of the meaning of "manifest" excess of power.