- 54 -
that point. By experience, Mr. Brower is knowledgeable
concerning legal issues involving compensation for expropriation
under public international law and the practice of international
arbitration involving such disputes.11 Mr. Brower was accepted
by the Court as an expert witness. The Court found Mr. Brower’s
testimony to be forthright and credible.
Mr. Brower has an opinion as to the compatibility of the
tribunal’s reasoning with international law. He believes that it
is impossible to determine from the face of the award whether or
not the tribunal’s award of compensation to Aminoil is consistent
with relevant principles of public international law (which was
the law applied by the tribunal). He is of the opinion that the
tribunal’s award of compensation to Aminoil would in fact be
consistent with such principles, however, if, but only if, the
“level of inflation”, “for which there was no precedent
11 Mr. Brower’s credentials are impressive: During the period
1969-1973 he served in the U.S. Department of State, successively
as assistant legal adviser for European affairs, deputy legal
adviser, and acting legal adviser. In that last position, he was
the principal international lawyer for the Government of the
United States in addition to being the chief lawyer for the
Secretary of State and the U.S. Department of State. He was
responsible for both the pursuit and defense of international
claims involving the Unites States. From 1984 to 1988, he served
full-time as a judge of the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal in the
Hague. He is currently in private practice as a member of the
law firm of White & Case. He serves by designation of the United
States as a member of the Register of Experts of the United
Nations Compensation Commission in Geneva, as well as serving on
the Secretary of State’s Advisory Committee on Public
International Law.
Page: Previous 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011