On April 27, 2020, the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes published its award in Global Telecom Holding S.A.E. v. Canada. The case concerns an alleged breach by Canada of the Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the Arab Republic of Egypt for the promotion and Protection of Investments (BIT). Specifically, Global Telecom Holding (GTH) “asserts . . . that Canada . . . fail[ed] to (a) afford GTH fair and equitable treatment, (b) ensure full protection and security of GTH’s investment, (c) guarantee the unrestricted transfer of GTH’s investment, and (d) grant GTH’s investment treatment no less favourable than that which it provides to investments of its own investors.” Canada posed several objections related to jurisdiction. The Tribunal dismissed all of them except one, concluding that it did not have “jurisdiction over GTH’s claim that Canada violated its national treatment obligations set forth in the BIT.” In that case, it decided that the list of exceptions Canada included in its annex to Article IV (which included both “social services” and “services in any other sector” and therefore covered the telecommunications sector) allowed it to afford different treatment to GTH under BIT than it does Canadian nationals. Gary Born issued a dissenting opinion on this point, arguing that “the Tribunal’s interpretation of Article IV(2)(d) on this issue is impossible to reconcile with either the language of the BIT or the evident object and purpose of the Treaty.”

 

At the merits stage, the Tribunal considered the remaining claims by GTH, “determin[ing] that GTH ha[d] failed to establish that Canada breached any of its obligations set forth in the BIT.” Finally, it “[d]ismiss[ed] GTH’s request for damages” and “[o]rder[ed] the Parties to bear the arbitration costs in equal parts.”