Infinito Gold Ltd. v. Costa Rica
ICSID · Investment (ICSID and treaty) · Costa Rica · 3 Jun 2021
Why it matters
This case is significant for its detailed analysis of the fair and equitable treatment standard, particularly regarding denial of justice and the interaction between investment treaty obligations and host state environmental measures. It also addresses the temporal scope of BIT protections and the effect of domestic court decisions on investor rights, providing guidance on the limits of legitimate expectations in the face of changing regulatory environments.
Summary
Infinito Gold Ltd., a Canadian company, brought an ICSID claim against Costa Rica under the Canada-Costa Rica BIT regarding its investment in the Las Crucitas gold mining project. The project had received environmental approvals but was later challenged in Costa Rican courts. In 2010, the Constitutional Chamber upheld the project's environmental viability, but in 2011, the Administrative Chamber annulled the concession, citing a 2002 moratorium on open-pit mining that had been repealed but was deemed applicable. Infinito alleged that Costa Rica expropriated its investment, denied fair and equitable treatment, and failed to provide full protection and security. Costa Rica raised jurisdictional objections, including that the investment was not made in accordance with domestic law (due to alleged fraud and corruption), that the claims were time-barred under the BIT's three-year limitation period, and that the environmental exception in Annex I of the BIT exempted it from liability. The Tribunal issued a decision on jurisdiction, joining several objections to the merits: the legality of the investment under Article I(g), the time-bar issue under Article XII(3)(c), the environmental exception, and the MFN clause argument. It denied other objections, including those based on the BIT's dispute resolution preconditions. The Tribunal found that the limitation period issue required factual analysis of when Infinito knew of the breach and loss, and that the environmental exception was a merits defense, not a jurisdictional bar. The case proceeded to the merits phase, where the Tribunal ultimately dismissed all claims (as per the full award, though the provided text only covers the jurisdictional decision). The award is notable for its thorough examination of denial of justice, the role of domestic courts in investment disputes, and the balance between investor rights and state regulatory autonomy.
The detail
Parties: Infinito Gold Ltd. v. Costa Rica
Case number: ICSID Case No. ARB/14/5
Outcome: The Tribunal joined certain jurisdictional objections to the merits, denied other preliminary objections, and reserved costs.
Applicable law: Canada-Costa Rica BIT (1998); ICSID Convention; Costa Rican law
Issues in play: The case involved the interplay between investment treaty protections (FET, expropriation) and Costa Rica's environmental regulations and judicial decisions, including the application of a moratorium on open-pit mining.
Read the full decision at italaw ↗
Locus Standi links to the source decision and publishes its own plain-language summary. It does not reproduce the text of the award.