• Copy the reference
  • Tutorial video

Interocean Oil v. Nigeria

Interocean Oil Development Company and Interocean Oil Exploration Company v. Federal Republic of Nigeria, ICSID Case No. ARB/13/20
Nature of the proceedings:
International
Type of case:
Investor-State
Economic sector:
5Mining and quarrying
Date of introduction:
9 Sept 2013
Status of the case:
Decided in favor of State
Claimant’s country of origin:
United States
Respondent:
Nigeria
Institution:
ICSID (International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes)
Rules of arbitration:
Seat of arbitration:
London
Applicable law:
Nigeria

Documents of the case

profile picture William W. Park President
profile picture Julian D. M. Lew Appointed by the investor
profile picture Edward Torgbor Appointed by the State
Source(s) of the individual document(s):
Reproduced with the permission of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes :
Link1 (EN) Official source

Lawyers, other representatives, expert(s), tribunal’s secretary

    Procedural Order No. 3

    [1].
    The Tribunal has carefully considered Claimants' document requests as memorialized in the Redfern Schedule transmitted to the Tribunal by ICISD on 4 February, as well as Respondent's comments thereon. As provided by Section 15 of Procedural Order No. 1 of 26 February 2014, the Tribunal has been guided by the 2010 IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration, which permit the Tribunal to order production of documents relevant to the case and material to its outcome, and not subject to valid objections that include inter alia privilege and unreasonable burden. Having taken into account principles of procedural economy and proportionality, the Tribunal directs as follows, with reference to the requests as numbered in Claimants' Redfern Schedule, reproduced in Annex 1.

    Request No.1. Advice given by legal officers. Request denied on the basis of privilege.

    Request No.2. All correspondence in relation to ownership claims. Request denied as overly broad under the IBA standards.

    Request No.3. Crude Oil lifting records re OML 98. Request granted.

    Request No.4. Minutes of JOC meetings. Request granted.

    Request No.5. Return of Allotment of Shares. Request granted.

    Request No.6. All correspondence in relation to OML renewal. Request denied as overly broad under IBA standards.

    Request No.7. Joint Venture documents. The Tribunal notes that the request has been withdrawn.

    Request No.8. All correspondence between NNPC and Petroleum Ministry. Request denied as overly broad under IBA standards.

    Request No.9. Ministerial Approvals. Request granted.

    Request No.10. Legal memoranda on debt in ICC case. Request denied on the basis of privilege.

    Request No.11. Payment information on ICC arbitration. Request granted.

    [2].
    With respect to all requests as to which the requests have been granted (Requests Nos. 3, 4, 5, 9, 11), production is directed only with respect to material created during the five years immediately before filing of the present ICSID arbitration proceedings.
    [3].
    The Parties shall confer on an appropriate timetable for production, providing the Tribunal with a status report not later than seven (7) calendar days from issuance of this Procedural Order.
    Subsequent citations of this document as a whole:
    Subsequent citations of this excerpt:
    Click on the text to select an element Click elsewhere to unselect an element
    Select a key word :
    1 /

    Instantly access the most relevant case law, treaties and doctrine.

    Start your Free Trial

    Already registered ?