Gonzalo Mora Velarde v Mexico

At a glance

Parties

Gonzalo Mora Velarde (Spain), on his own behalf and for Central de Alimentación Gourmet Hispano Mexicana, S.A. de C.V. and Hispacun S.A. de C.V., v. the United Mexican States

Forum and rules

Pre-arbitration notice under Article IX of the Spain–Mexico BIT; no arbitration had been filed at the date of the document

Treaty

Spain–Mexico BIT (APPRI), signed in Mexico City on 10 October 2006

Sector

Gourmet food and beverage import and distribution

Outcome

Only the notice of intent is published. It opened the six-month consultation period. The published documents do not show any later proceedings.

Amount

The amount of damages claimed is redacted in the public version.

The dispute

Gonzalo Mora Velarde is a Spanish national living in Madrid. He is the majority shareholder of two Mexican companies, CAGHM and Hispacun, which had imported and distributed Spanish gourmet food and drink in Mexico since October 2011. In December 2015 the Veracruz customs office ordered a check on an imported container, citing a supposed animal-health irregularity. The goods were seized as a precaution from 11 January 2016, and on 31 March 2016 the customs office declared them property of the Federal Treasury. The customs agent then won a nullity judgment before the Federal Court of Administrative Justice, which ordered the goods returned or compensation paid. Only after that judgment did the customs office reveal that the goods had been destroyed. On 30 April 2019 the authorities ordered payment of the appraised value of the goods only. Mr Mora says the seizure and loss of the goods cost the group its clients and its business, and he alleges breaches of Article IV (minimum standard of treatment) and Article V (nationalisation and expropriation) of the BIT.

Key holdings

1. The document contains no decision. It is an investor's supplementary notice of intent. It confirms the original notice filed on 28 August 2020 and adds documents that the COVID-19 pandemic had delayed. p. 7
2. The investor claims that Mexico breached Article IV (minimum standard of treatment) and Article V (nationalisation and expropriation) of the Spain–Mexico BIT. He calls the customs measures illegal under Mexican law, arbitrary, discriminatory and contrary to international law. pp. 6–7
3. Damages are to be calculated in part by the Price Earning Ratio (PER) method, which values the companies on their expected profits. The amounts are redacted. pp. 7–8
4. The investor invites Mexico to hold consultations. Under Article XI(3) of the BIT, the notice starts the six-month period that must pass before the dispute can be submitted to arbitration. pp. 8–9

Procedural history

1. 1 December 2015The Veracruz customs office orders verification of the imported goods. A precautionary seizure follows from 11 January 2016.
2. 31 March 2016The Veracruz customs office declares the seized goods property of the Federal Treasury.
3. 2016The customs agent files a nullity claim before the Federal Court of Administrative Justice. The court annuls the customs decision; the date of the judgment is redacted.
4. 30 April 2019The authorities order compensation limited to the appraised value of the goods, which had been destroyed.
5. 28 August 2020Original notice of intent filed with the Secretaría de Economía.
6. 4 September 2020Supplementary notice of intent filed.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

For the claimant

Galicia Abogados, S.C.

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

• Spain–Mexico BIT
• notice of intent
• customs seizure
• Aduana de Veracruz
• destruction of goods
• indirect expropriation
• minimum standard of treatment
• gourmet food
• import and distribution
• Price Earning Ratio
• consultation period
• Federal Court of Administrative Justice
• animal health
• precautionary seizure

Summary generated with AI from the published documents — refer to the award for the authoritative text.