- 21 -
could be fully effective only for a period shorter than the
60-year term of the concession agreement, and (3) the
stabilization clauses had lost much of their force through
changes in the relations between the parties since 1948. Thus,
section five provides: “a lawful nationalisation of Aminoil’s
undertaking had occurred.”
The tribunal’s analysis and conclusion with respect to the
stabilization clauses was not unanimous. Sir Gerald G.
Fitzmaurice disagreed with the majority’s analysis of the
stabilization clauses. He concluded that the expropriation was
irreconcilable with the stabilization clauses. Despite that
conclusion, however, Judge Fitzmaurice noted his “entire
agreement with the Operational Part (Dispositif) of the Award”,
i.e., the bottom line, net compensation awarded to Aminoil of
$179,750,764.
8. The Question of Indemnification
The tribunal’s discussion of indemnification in the seventh
section of the award (section seven) is divided into two parts,
the first dealing with “Principles and Methods” and the second
determining amounts due.
The tribunal begins the first part by recognizing that there
is “a very considerable gap” between Aminoil’s claim, based on
the lost profits value of the concession, and Kuwait’s offer,
based on net book value of the assets expropriated. Section
seven identifies “appropriate compensation” as the applicable
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011