From our private database of 35,400+ case briefs...
BG Group v. Republic of Argentina
United States Supreme Court
134 S. Ct. 1198 (2014)
BG Group plc (BG) (plaintiff), a British investment firm, purchased a majority interest in MetroGAS, a gas-distribution company created by the Republic of Argentina (Argentina) (defendant) to privatize its state-owned gas utility. MetroGAS had a long-term exclusive license to distribute natural gas in Buenos Aires, and BG won the bid when Argentina submitted a controlling interest in MetroGAS to international public tender. The United Kingdom and Argentina had signed an investment treaty containing a dispute-resolution provision that governed disputes between one of the signing countries and an investor from the other signing country. The treaty provided that parties could submit disputes to a local court in the signing country in which the investment was made. Arbitration was available if a party requested it and if 18 months had passed since the dispute was submitted to the local court or if the court issued a final decision and the parties were still in dispute. The parties could also agree to proceed directly to arbitration. A dispute arose under the treaty when Argentina changed gas-tariff calculations and MetroGAS suffered financial losses. BG sought arbitration under the treaty, and the parties commenced arbitration hearings in the United States. While arguing the merits of the alleged treaty violations, Argentina argued that the arbitration panel did not have jurisdiction over the dispute because BG initiated arbitration without first litigating in Argentina’s courts. The arbitration panel ruled in favor of BG. BG and Argentina sought review in federal district court, with BG seeking confirmation of the award under the New York Convention and the Federal Arbitration Act and Argentina seeking to vacate the award. The district court confirmed the award, and the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the award on appeal. BG appealed to the United States Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Breyer, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 617,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 617,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,400 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.