ESQ Legal Practice Magazine JUNE 2014 EDITION | Page 21

Arbitration. An award was
rendered in the Cairo
Arbitration and was partly in
H&H's favour. Following the
Cairo Arbitration, H&H issued
a series of claims before the
local courts in Egypt (the
Domestic Litigation). At the
end of 2001, H&H was evicted
from the Resort.
In July 2009, H&H brought
ICSID proceedings against
Egypt under the US-Egypt
BIT, claiming that Egypt had
breached various provisions of
the BIT, including those
concerning fair and equitable
treatment, expropriation and

www.esqlaw.net

full protection and security.
H&H also made denial of
justice and denial of effective
remedies claims in relation to
the Domestic Litigation. Egypt
objected to the Tribunal's
jurisdiction on various bases,
including the fork-in-road
provision in the BIT.
Egypt argued that the fork-inthe-road clause was triggered
when H&H filed a
counterclaim in the Cairo
Arbitration and when it filed
its claims in the local courts of
Egypt. H&H submitted that
the fork-in-the-road provision
had not been triggered

because it claims had been
“pursued in the local fora, on the
one hand, and the claims pursued
in the present arbitration on the
other hand do not meet the triple
identity test . . . that even though
the local proceedings and this
arbitration involve the same
parties, the causes of action are
not the same, as the present
arbitration involves treaty claims
and not