The Influence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal on ICSID and the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Context of State Responsibility

The Iran-United States Claims Tribunal (IUSCT) stands as one of the most significant international arbitral institutions, having adjudicated a wide array of disputes over several consecutive decades. It has generated a rich body of jurisprudence that warrants comprehensive analysis from various perspectives. One such dimension is its influence on international arbitration practices, which merits in-depth examination. This article aims to explore the impact of the IUSCT on the practices of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) and the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) concerning state responsibility. To this end, the study employs a descriptive-analytical methodology, drawing on library-based data to achieve its objectives. The findings of the research indicate that the IUSCT has significantly influenced the arbitration practices of ICSID and the PCA in matters pertaining to state responsibility. For instance, the PCA, in cases such as Paushok v. Russia and Allard v. Barbados, which were conducted under international arbitration rules and UNCITRAL rules, has relied on the jurisprudence of the IUSCT to expand the scope of state responsibility in ensuring fair and equitable resolution of disputes with foreign investor companies. Similarly, ICSID, in cases like Santa Elena v. Costa Rica, has drawn on precedents from the IUSCT to develop the concept of state responsibility in matters involving compensation for expropriation of foreign investor companies and the determination of fair compensation amounts.