The Desertec Concept and the ICSID Convention - Investing into North African Solar Power - page 179

meaningless provision. 358 There were also cases where the decision was later on
annulled because of the missing application of the objective approach. 359 Further-
more, one tribunal mentioned that all Salini criteria must be satisfied individually
and not in an overall perspective. 360 If the project does not meet the ICSID
requirement of investment, the fact that it is an investment concerning the respec-
tive BIT does not matter. 361 Overall, there are several cases supporting the objec-
tive approach. 362 In addition, the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) mentioned
that investment always has an inherent meaning, regardless of the applicable
arbitration institution. 363 This encompasses a contribution, which extends over a
certain amount of time and involves risk. 364

3.6.3.3 The Subjective Approach

The main idea of the subjective approach is that the parties subjectively define
investment based on their consent to ICSID arbitration. 365 Consequently, there are
no grounds in Art. 25(1) of the ICSID Convention to apply the Salini test because it
is against the will of the drafters and signatories. 366 As a result, the scope of the BIT
and hence its definition of investment is crucial for ICSID jurisdiction. 367 This
approach is also known as the intuitive approach. 368 A lot of tribunals champion the
subjective approach. 369

358 ICSID [2004] ARB/03/11—Award, 11 paras 49-50.
359 ICSID [2006] ARB/99/7—Annulment, 12 para 27.
360 ICSID [2006] ARB/05/19, 23-24 para 77.
361 ICSID [2007] ARB/05/10—Award, 49 para 148.
362 ICSID [2009] ARB/06/5—Award, 29 para 74 and 45 para 114; ICSID [2009] ARB/05/10—
Annulment—Dissenting Opinion (Shahabuddeen), 38 (50-57) paras 40-61; ICSID [2008]
ARB/05/19—Award, paras 35-36 117-120 ICSID [2007] ARB/05/18, 32 para 116; ICSID
[2007] ARB/05/07, 28 para 99; cf ICSID [2007] ARB/05/10—Award 48-49 paras 144-146;
ICSID [2006] ARB/05/19, 23-24 para 77; ICSID [2006] ARB/99/7—Annulment, 8-16 paras
23-41; ICSID [2006] ARB/04/13, 28-29 paras 91-92; ICSID [2005] ARB/03/29, 34 para 130;
ICSID [2004] ARB/03/11—Award, 12 para 53; Also not directly, the tribunal supports the idea of
objective criteria, in: ICSID [1997] ARB/96/3, 1378 (1387) para 43.
363

Permanent Court of Arbitration [2009] PCA Case No. AA280—Award, 53-54 para 207.

364

Permanent Court of Arbitration [2009] PCA Case No. AA280—Award, 53-54 para 207.

365

Hamida ( 2007 ), 287 (289); Johannsen ( 2009 ), 5 (6).

366

ICSID [2010] ARB/07/16—Award, 109-110 para 311.

367

ICSID [2009] ARB/07/9, 28-29 para 78; ICSID [1999] ARB/95/3—Award, 458 (494-495)
para 83.
368 Gaillard ( 2009 ), 403 (410).
369 ICSID [2014] ARB/07/8—Decision, 143-144 para 296; ICSID [2014] ARB/07/27—Award,
67 para 185 ICSID [2014] ARB/12/2—Award, 46-47 para 148; ICSID [2013] ARB/11/23—
Award, 89-90 para 369; ICSID [2013] ARB/10/5—Decision on Jurisdiction, 47-48 para 142;
ICSID [2012] ARB/07/29—Award, 20-22 paras 71-78; Only considering the BIT, in: ICSID
[2012] ARB/09/1—Decision on Jurisdiction, 47-49 paras 208-214; ICSID [2012] ARB/08/11—