{"id":284998,"date":"2025-02-26T11:00:00","date_gmt":"2025-02-26T10:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/?p=284998"},"modified":"2025-03-10T00:28:16","modified_gmt":"2025-03-09T23:28:16","slug":"the-legal-framework-governing-interest-rates-part-3","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/world\/2025\/02\/the-legal-framework-governing-interest-rates-part-3","title":{"rendered":"The Legal Framework Governing Interest Rates – Part 3"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Setting Fair Interest Rates Based on Loss and Market Conditions<\/strong><\/h1>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n

THE AUTHOR<\/strong>:
Naimeh Masumy, <\/strong>Research Fellow at Deakin University<\/strong> & PhD Candidate at Maastricht University<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n
\n

Explore our comprehensive series examining the challenges of applying statutory rates, commercial benchmarks, and compound interest<\/a> in international disputes. Through case law and evolving practices, it examines how statutory rates often misalign with market realities, the uncertainty of commercial floating rates post-LIBOR, and the contentious application of compound interest with unclear doctrinal foundations.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n


Having established the absence of coherent guidelines in public international law and the CISG for quantifying interest, as well as the shortcomings of conflict-of-law analysis in resolving key issues\u2014such as the divide between commercial and fixed rates, the application of compound interest, and the inconsistencies between domestic legal systems and public international law\u2014this section outlines a method for determining a fair and reasonable rate of return. This approach, in line with UNIDROIT recommendations, aims to accurately reflect actual losses while aligning with market conditions. The objective is to ensure the rate is tailored to the specifics of each case and remains sensitive to broader market trends.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The suggested framework addresses three key issues:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. Excessive Discretion of Tribunals<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    Arbitral tribunals often have considerable leeway in determining interest rates. They are not strictly bound by rigid local rules or practices, and they can modify interest rates as needed within legal boundaries<\/a>. Interest rates are an integral part of damage calculations and should be applied impartially, much like other procedural decisions. Accurate interest rate determination requires factual precision, especially in complex cases, and must consider factors such as inflation and associated risks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      \n
    1. Limited Role of State-Mandated Regulations<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

      Setting a realistic interest rate should minimize interference from local regulations. For example, in Middle East Comet v. Egypt<\/em>, the tribunal found that applying a fixed rate didn\u2019t account for the country\u2019s economic instability, leading to under-compensation. Therefore, a broader view that considers the economic environment is essential.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        \n
      1. Problems with Relying on LIBOR<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

        Using a single rate like LIBOR can oversimplify the process and ignore industry-specific variations. Different sectors experience unique inflation rates\u2014industries with complex global supply chains face more volatility compared to those with localized operations. A one-size-fits-all approach can distort the true impact of interest rates on different industries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        <\/div>\n\n\n\n

        Proposed Scheme: Investment-Based Interest Rate Determination<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

        The proposed approach uses investment performance as the main factor in determining gains or losses, focusing on interest earnings, capital growth, associated risks, and generated income. This method, supported by Iran-U.S. claims tribunals, views investment return rates as more accurate indicators than standard commercial rates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        The suggested model takes into account several key variables of Multi-Factor Analysis for Interest Rate Adjustment:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          \n
        1. Varying Inflation Levels: <\/strong>Inflation trends differ significantly between countries.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        2. Industry-Specific Inflation:<\/strong> Each industry experiences distinct inflation patterns.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        3. Risk Evaluations:<\/strong> Different investments carry varying levels of market, credit, or country-specific risks.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

          This proposal prioritizes using investment return rates instead of conventional interest rate calculations. Investment disputes typically focus on a few core economic sectors, making it easier to choose a rate that aligns with the nature of the investment. Each investment has unique risks, depending on the project type.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          <\/div>\n\n\n\n

          Adjusted Compound Interest Formula<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

          The formula adjusts the standard compound interest by factoring in inflation and risk:<\/p>\n\n\n

          \n
          \"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

          So, Real Interest Rate = r – i – \u03c3<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Where:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          r = Nominal interest rate<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          i = Inflation rate<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          \u03c3 = Risk premium (reflects additional risks such as market volatility or credit risks)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          The formula then uses this adjusted rate in place of the nominal rate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          <\/div>\n\n\n\n

          Understanding Rate Sensitivity<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

          Interest rate sensitivity indicates how factors like risks and inflation affect the overall rate of return. When diverse and cumulative risks are high, the rate of return decreases. With minimal risk, the rate of return increases. Two main factors influence this sensitivity:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            \n
          1. Fluctuation:<\/strong> The extent to which inflation or other factors vary.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
          2. Risk Premium:<\/strong> The additional return required to compensate for investment risks.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

            The essence of this proposal is to view investment performance as a primary measure for assessing damages in disputes. A review of ICSID cases<\/a> shows that most disputes involve a limited set of industries, reinforcing the importance of using investment outcomes to gauge financial impacts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            The following table presents the distribution of investment tribunal disputes across five predominant industries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            An analysis of case data reveals that disputes are evenly distributed across electric power & other energy, finance, oil & gas & mining, construction, transportation, other industry, and information & communication, each accounting for approximately 14.3% of cases. These disputes primarily involve electricity distribution enterprises, renewable energy generation, banking services, mining concessions, infrastructure projects, air transportation services, and industrial manufacturing, underscoring the financial significance of investment performance in resolving such conflicts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            <\/div>\n\n\n\n

            Assessing Risk Premium in Key Industries<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

            The first step in the proposed formula involves integrating risk premiums to evaluate the investment’s exposure to specific risks and their potential impact on cash flow and profitability. Some investments are highly sensitive to particular risks, which can substantially influence short-term earnings and long-term value.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            <\/div>\n\n\n\n

            Steps for Accounting for Risk Premium<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

            <\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Identify Sources of Risk and Uncertainty<\/strong>: The first step begins by determining the types of risks that could affect performance and returns. For instance, oil and gas projects are not only capital-intensive but are also subject to heavy regulations. This makes them susceptible to government regulatory actions such as property seizures, tax disputes, or evolving environmental laws. Cases like First Majestic Silver v. Mexico (I)<\/em><\/a>and Alamos Gold v. Turkey<\/em><\/a>highlight these challenges, where changes in government policy or tax regulations undermine profitability and contractual obligations. The risks associated with such projects are illustrated in the accompanying chart.<\/p>\n\n\n

            \n
            \"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

            <\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Calculate Premium Risks Using a Risk-Adjusted Discount Rate<\/strong>: A Risk-Adjusted Discount Rate (\u201cRADR<\/strong>\u201d) is used to reflect risk in the determination of interest rates. This modifies the standard discount rate to reflect the risks associated with the investment, as illustrated in the following table:<\/p>\n\n\n

            \n
            \"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n
            <\/div>\n\n\n\n

            Incorporating Risks into the Calculation of Interest Rates<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

            In this mechanism, the rate adjusts for various risks affecting the compensation, such as:<\/p>\n\n\n\n