Deconstructing Turkcell V. Iran: The First Investment Treaty Claim against Iran

Ardeshir Atai Ahari

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Once an arbitral tribunal is constituted, the preliminary issue to be decided is the question of jurisdiction and admissibility of the claim. At the pre-merit stage, the tribunal determines whether it has jurisdiction over the disputes to proceed with the substantive issues. In investment arbitration, the jurisdictional requirements are contained in bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and the 1966 Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of other States (ICSID Convention) and municipal laws. This article critically analyses the first BIT claim against Iran by reconstructing the Turkcell arbitration case. The Turkcell case concerned complex questions of Iranian and international law concerning the jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal over investment activities. The Turkcell case highlights the important issue of interpretation of treaty provisions concerning the definition of investment (ratione materiae) and investors (ratione personae).
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)453-464
Number of pages12
JournalArbitration: The International Journal of Arbitration, Mediation and Dispute Management
Volume90
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2024

Keywords

  • Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)
  • Iranian BITs
  • bilateral investment treaties (BITs)
  • investment treaty arbitration
  • investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS)
  • jurisdiction of arbitration tribunal
  • scope of application of BITs

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Deconstructing Turkcell V. Iran: The First Investment Treaty Claim against Iran'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this