Zwilzric, the calculation of damages is really up to the arbitrators. Both sides would make arguments that would benefit themselves, but here are the basic guidelines.

Under the BIT, "compensation shall be based on the genuine value of the investment or returns expropriated immediately before the expropriation or at the time the proposed expropriation became public knowledge, whichever is the earlier, shall be payable from the date of expropriation with interest at a normal commercial rate" Art. VII § 1. [So here, I would think the arbitration notification date would make the most sense to the panel, plus interest.]

There is also an argument to be made that we should get the same treatment as in the new Russian BIT under Article III of the Canadian BIT, which provides for a most favored nation status. So if the Russians would get current value for the lost property, that is what we should get.

Contract law generally values damages for breach to insure that the injured party receives what they expected from the bargain. That is, the damages should enough to place Crystallex in the same position as if the contract had been fully performed. In any event, if you can move the argument to the point of timing the calculation of damages, you are talking a very large number.

As an aside, one other point is that Venezuela always makes the loser argument that the panel lacks jurisdiction, but the treaty is specific on this: "Each Contracting Party hereby gives its unconditional consent to the submission of a dispute to international arbitration in accordance with the provisions of this Article." Art. XII § 5.