Chapter 6

Lost on the Way to Chorzów: 
Have Arbitrators Just Been Paying Lip Service to the PCIJ’s Seminal Case in Their Damages Analyses?

PANEL 2

DR. SABAHI:  Thank you very much everyone for being here today.  We had a terrific first panel.  And our second panel talks about a very well‑known concept in awarding damages, and the title, I think, says it all: “Lost on the way toChorzów: Have arbitrators just been paying lip service to the PCIJ’s seminal case in their damages analyses?”

We used to have our damages topics in the afternoon.  It was usually Panel 4, but we changed our format this year because we thought these topics were better to be discussed earlier, while people still have energy, and we have a full panel of experts here to discuss this. 

I’m going to introduce our moderator, who is very well known–Mr. Timothy Nelson.  Tim is a partner in the law firm of Skadden Arps.  He has a significant amount of experience in both international arbitration and litigation.  He has done cases under the ICC, ICSID, ICDR, ad hoc UNCITRAL Rules, and a number of major international litigations under the Federal Arbitration Act, FSIA, Alien Tort Claims Act, New York Convention, the Hague Convention on Service of Process, and a number of other major laws.  Among his major cases, some of which you may know, are Kardassopoulos v. Georgiaand Cemex v. Venezuela. 

He has been recognized as a leading lawyer by Chambers Global, Chambers USA, and Who’s Who Legal, Arbitration.  He has a BA and LLB from University of New South Wales and BCL from Oxford University.

MR. NELSON:  Thank you very much, Borzu.  I’m delighted to see such a wonderful crowd here today to discuss a topic of continuing importance in international law, generally, and investor‑State and bilateral treaty law.  Following our format, we have two authors who will be giving their views on the assigned question, relating to the Chorzów Factory Case.