135. This non-exhaustive definition is, in our view, sufficiently broad to
encompass the PSI Agreement because: firstly, the Agreement’s performance,
by granting SGS the right to carry out pre-shipment inspection services, gave
rise to “claims to money;” secondly, Pakistan effectively granted SGS a public
law concession (“a concession under public law”), since SGS was conferred certain
powers that ordinarily would have been exercised by the Pakistani
Customs service (the identification and valuation of goods for duty purposes);
and thirdly, such rights as SGS exercised pursuant to the PSI Agreement were
“rights given by law” and “by contract.”
136. The PSI Agreement defined the commitments of SGS in such a way
as to ensure that SGS, if it was to comply with them, had to make certain
expenditures in the territory of Pakistan. While the expenditures may be relatively
small (Pakistan’s Reply estimates them as amounting to approximately
U.S.$800,000, while SGS presents the estimate of U.S.$1.5 million),154 they
involved the injection of funds into the territory of Pakistan for the carrying
out of SGS’s engagements under the PSI Agreement