RE:RE:Regular analyses in the German-speaking Forum on Gabriel@RIDER1975 -
Thank you for the question.
The Argentinian arbitrator (who decidedly does not support the majority opinion) mainly commented on the environmental permit procedure. According to his opinion, there was a political intervention in the procedure: the rejection of the special law on September 9, 2013 in the Romanian parliament. The Prime Minister, who brought the law to parliament, also voted against it.
In addition, A. Grigera Nan showed that Romania's continued (negative) behavior against Gabriel Resources violated the Canada-Romania BIT. The majority of the arbitration tribunal is of the opinion that the misconduct was time-barred. A. Grigera Nan has shown that the majority opinion on this is wrong.
P.S. Added to this is the inclusion of Rosia Montana in the UNESCO list of threatened landscapes. The majority is of the opinion that mining operations would still be possible - if the environmental permit were granted. Therefore, it was not expropriation. A. Grigera Nan has not written anything about this - but White&Case has written about it in the annulment request.