I. Introduction 

1. I have had the benefit of reading the majority award (“Majority Award”) authored by my distinguished colleagues. I have respect for their erudition and experience. I regret, however, that I find myself unable to agree with some of the reasons given and conclusions reached by them. I am, therefore, compelled to write this dissent. 

2. In particular, I do not agree that: 

(i) the Hedging Agreement (“Hedging Agreement”) constitutes an investment for the purposes of the Germany-Sri Lanka BIT (“Treaty”), I discuss this in Section II. A; 

(ii) the Hedging Agreement (“Hedging Agreement”) constitutes an investment for the purposes of the ICSID Convention (“Convention”), I discuss this in Section II. B; 

(iii) the debt owed to the Claimant by the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (“CPC”) was expropriated in violation of Article 3 of the Treaty and that the Claimant is, therefore, entitled to damages, I discuss this in Section III;