1. The short identification below is without prejudice to the Parties' full presentation of the factual and legal details of the case and the Tribunal's considerations and conclusions.
C.I. Claimant's Perspective
2. The following quotations from Claimant's Principal Memorial and Claimant's Reply Memorial summarize the main aspects of the dispute as follows (C-III ~~ 17-18, 341; C-IV~~ 2- 5; C-V ~ 2; footnotes omitted):
2. In the 1990s, because of declining oil production, PDVSA and the Government invited Mobil CN and other foreign oil companies to enter into joint ventures to develop EHO reserves, located in the Orinoco Oil Basin, which had never been commercially exploited. Attracting foreign investment to EHO projects was a difficult task, because the Republic of Venezuela had expropriated the interests of foreign oil companies (including Mobil Oil Corporation) in 1975. To overcome foreign investors' concerns about another expropriation, the
Government provided investors with financial incentives to make the projects commercially attractive, and contractual and legal protections against governmental measures that might harm their investments. Those incentives and protections were enacted into law during the Government's "Oil Opening" and embodied in agreements with investors, including the Cerro Negro AA, which was approved by the Venezuelan Congress. Chief among the contractual protections was PDVSA-CN's commitment, guaranteed by PDVSA, to indemnify
Mobil CN for any "expropriation or seizure" of its interests and for other "Discriminatory Measures" imposed by the Government that caused a Materially Adverse Impact on Mobil CN's cash flows from the Project. (C-IV '1f2).