The principle of compensation in the practice of the Iran-United States claims tribunal and the transnational rules : shared values?
This study examines how the Iran--United States Claims Tribunal (IUSCT), established 1981, applies compensation rules in its practice and the relationship of those rules to the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts (UPICC). Academics point out that the framers designed UPICC to settle private international commercial disputes, not international disputes between states and investors, which relate usually to expropriation. A crucial question emerges: can general principles of law serve as substantive law in investor--state or interstate arbitrations? IUSCT practice, involving about 880 awards and decisions in investor--state disputes over more than 35 years, contains substantial jurisprudence in this field. This study proceeds through case studies and comparison of the tribunal’s jurisprudence with UPICC’s principle of compensation and related rules in the Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), 1980. It explores the tribunal’s interpretation and application of the principle of compensation and the extent of UPICC’s influence on the reasoning in its awards The tribunal’s implicit – and more recently explicit – adoption and/or adaptation of UPICC principles not only bolsters UPICC’s authority but also brings predictability and certainty to the application of UPICC rules and provides a useful model for other international tribunals. This study of the IUSCT awards strongly suggests the conclusion that UPICC, as a widespread and influential codification of general principles of international commercial contract law, is superbly suited for application as substantive law in arbitrating international investment disputes.
Damage Expropriation Iran_United States Claims Tribunal UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts (UPICC) Transnational commercial Contract law International arbitration Compensation Interest