Ref. Ares(2015)5993775 - 22/12/2015
Ref. Ares(2016)541363 - 01/02/2016
From:
(TRADE)
Sent: 21 April 2015 02:14
To:
SCHLEGELMILCH Rupert (TRADE); RUBINACCI Leopoldo (TRADE);
PETRICCIONE
Mauro Raffaele (TRADE);
(TRADE); GARCIA BERCERO Ignacio
(TRADE);
(TRADE);
(TRADE);
(TRADE); REDONNET Denis (TRADE);
(TRADE);
(TRADE);
(TRADE);
[Art. 4.1(b)]
(TRADE);
(TRADE);
(TRADE);
(TRADE);
(TRADE);
(TRADE);
(TRADE);
(TRADE);
(TRADE-BANGKOK);
(EEAS-
WASHINGTON);
(EEAS-WASHINGTON)
Cc:
(TRADE)
Subject:
Meeting with ICSID
[Out of scope]
>
> I met today with Meg Kinner (SG ICSID and former senior Canadian Govt
lawyer) and Aurelia Antonetti
(senior lawyer at ICSID). We mostly discussed the technical issues
related to the establishment of an
appellate mechanism/permanent court but also touched upon other issues
related to ICSID (EU
situation, possible accession of Poland to ICSID (and of India and Viet
Nam) and intra-EU issues). We also
briefly touched upon the situation in Canada.
>
> In the issues relating to the establishment of an appellate mechanism
the discussions identified a list of
issues to be addressed which was very similar to the issues identified by
F2 (e.g. scope of appeal,
relationship to ICSID annulment, relationship to NY Convention,
organisation of appellate
mechanism/perm court, link to ICSID Convention enforcement, use of other
rules, costs - will send more
details of issues identified within F2 and B2).
[Art. 4.1(a)
third indent]
[Art. 4.1(a) third indent]
>
[Art. 4.1(a) third indent]
>
[Art. 4.1(a) third indent]
>
[Art. 4.1(a) third indent]
>
[Art. 4.1(a) third indent]
>
[Art. 4.1(b)]
>
> Sent from my iPad