known decided investment arbitration cases gen.

[leka11]

помогите плиз перевести. не вполне понимаю суть

"However, of the eleven (11) known decided ECT investment arbitration cases involving a challenge to the regulatory measures of the host state (out of a total 31 awards):..."
(далее про указанные 11)

получается что есть " 11 известных арбитражных дел ....по которым вынесены решения"
но при этом далее - "out of a total 31 awards"

м.б. по одному делу несколько awards (а. решений)?

спасибо

[johnstephenson]

It breaks down as follows:

* of the 11 ....
* ECT investment arbitration cases involving a (blah blah) ....
* which [=cases] have been decided [ie, resolved/settled] ....
* and which [=cases] (we/he/whoever) know(s) about [ie, is/are aware of] ....
* (rest of sentence) ....

[leka11]

thank you!
as to the first part of the sentence it is clear per se
it is the reference to "out of a total 31 awards" that makes the whole sentence unclear

if we have "eleven (11) known decided cases ", why the author refers to " total 31 awards"

[johnstephenson]

Can you show the rest of the paragraph after '31 awards'?

[leka11]

However, of the eleven (11) known decided ECT investment arbitration cases involving a challenge to the regulatory measures of the host state (out of a total 31 awards):

• only one (1) case was upheld on the merits and awarded damages;
• one (1) case found a breach of ECT obligations but awarded no damages;
• eight (8) cases have been rejected at the jurisdictional or merits stages;
• on one (1) case there is no information, although the award was rendered in December 2016.

and it is the only the reference to 31 awards(((

[johnstephenson]

In arbitration and civil law cases, the arbitrator/judge 'awards' the case (and, in some cases, can also award damages/financial compensation) to whichever of the two parties he decides is in the right -- ie, to whichever party he agrees with. So there's an 'award' (noun) by the tribunal/court in favour of one party or the other.

So it looks as though:
• the arbitrators looked at a total of 31 cases in which they decided in favour of one party or the other;
• of these 31 cases, 11 cases were "ECT investment arbitration cases involving a challenge to the regulatory measures of the host state"; and
• of these 11 cases,
· 1 case was upheld (etc) ......
· 1 case found a breach (etc) ......
· 8 cases were rejected (etc) ......
and
· there's no information on 1 case (etc) .....
------------------------
So the author gives no information on 31 minus 11=20 of the 31 cases, but gives a breakdown of the 11 cases which were "ECT investment arbitration cases involving a challenge to the regulatory measures of the host state".

[leka11]

johnstephenson, thanks a lot for your help!
seems you are right and it means just that there is no information on 20 of the 31 cases