Author Archive: Albina Gasanbekova

rss feed

TSIKinvest LLC v. Republic of Moldova

TSIKinvest LLC v. Republic of Moldova

An investor filed the emergency arbitration proceeding against Moldova. The claims arose out of the suspension of claimant’s voting rights in a Moldovan bank and the forced sale of its shares within three months allegedly ordered by Moldova’s National Bank. The emergency arbitrator stayed Moldova’s attempts to force the claimant to divest its shares in a bank. The […]

Energoalians TOB v. Republic of Moldova

Energoalians TOB v. Republic of Moldova

In Energoalians TOB v. Republic of Moldova, an investor brought claims arising out of the non-payment of accumulated debt by the State-owned entity Moldtranselectro and by another former partner of Energoalians, for energy supplied in 1999-2000. The arbitration proceeded under the UNCITRAL Arbitration rules. The Tribunal decided in favour of the investor and the award was rendered on […]

State Enterprise “Energorynok v. Republic of Moldova

State Enterprise “Energorynok v. Republic of Moldova

Energorynok,  a state-owned energy company, brought an arbitration claim against the Republic of Moldova seeking to recover a debt of USD 1.7 million from an economic agent affiliated to Moldova’s Energy Ministry. The Tribunal found confusing and inconsistent the Claimant’s arguments on quantum and rejected the claim as groundless. The award was rendered on 29 January 2015 and is available […]

Iurii Bogdanov, Agurdino-Invest Ltd. and Agurdino-Chimia JSC v. Republic of Moldova

Iurii Bogdanov, Agurdino-Invest Ltd. and Agurdino-Chimia JSC v. Republic of Moldova

An investor filed the SCC arbitration claim alleging indirect expropriation after the Moldova’s Customs Department supposedly restricted the operations of claimant’s paint-manufacturing company in a so-called free economic zone. The tribunal rendered the decision on 31 January 2006 in favour of the State. The award is available here. Bogdanov and Agurdio Invest v.Moldova (SCC 2005)

ICSID Award Favours Turkmenistan and Spurs Controversy

ICSID Award Favours Turkmenistan and Spurs Controversy

On 8 March 2016, an ICSID Tribunal dismissed the claim of a Turkish investor against Turkmenistan finding that the alleged violation of the Turkey-Turkmenistan Bilateral treaty (“BIT”) was “entirely without merit.” The arbitral award appeared to be controversial and resulted in two dissenting opinions. İçkale İnşaat Limited Şirketi v. Turkmenistan (ICSID Case No. ARB/I0/24) is the first case […]

Remington Worldwide Limited (UK) v. Ukraine

Remington Worldwide Limited (UK) v. Ukraine

The Gibraltar registered company Remington Worldwide Limited (“Remington”) filed a request for arbitration with the SCC on 22 September 2008. According to information communicated  by the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, the company accused Ukraine of violating several provisions of Article 10 of the ECT, and, in particular, of failure to provide effective means for the assertion of claims and enforcement of […]

Alex Genin and Others v. Republic of Estonia

Alex Genin and Others v. Republic of Estonia

The award in Alex Genin and others rendered on June 25, 2001 in the case of Alex Genin, Eastern Credit Limited, Inc., and A.S. Baltoil against the Republic of Estonia dismissed a claim brought by Mr. Genin, a national of the United States, and two companies owned by him. The case was brought under the […]

Ioannis Kardassopoulos and Ron Fuchs v. Republic of Georgia

Ioannis Kardassopoulos and Ron Fuchs v. Republic of Georgia

Two oil traders have been awarded more than US$45 million each in damages from the Republic of Georgia in an ICSID award that advances a broad interpretation of the fair and equitable treatment (FET) standard. Ioannis Kardassopoulos v Republic of Georgia, ICSID Arbitration, (No. ARB:05:18, No ARB:07:15) Award dated 3 March 2010

Oko Pankki v. Republic of Estonia

Oko Pankki v. Republic of Estonia

In OKO Pankki, three banks brought claims arising out of Estonia’a default on loan agreements which had been made to a joint venture Estonian company. In bringing their claims, the claimants asserted violations of the standard of fair and equitable treatment under the Estonia-Germnay BIT and the Estonia-Finland BIT. The tribunal rendered the award in favor […]

United Utilities (Tallinn) B.V. and Aktsiaselts Tallinna Vesi v. Republic of Estonia

United Utilities (Tallinn) B.V. and Aktsiaselts Tallinna Vesi v. Republic of Estonia

In 2001, at the request of Estonia, United Utilities (Tallinn) BV made an investment in AS Tallinna Vesi by purchasing 50.4% of the shares in the Company. This was a part of Estonia’s privatisation of AS Tallinna Vesi. The privatisation was sponsored and closely supervised by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). Since […]

Bidzina Ivanishvili v. Republic of Georgia

Bidzina Ivanishvili v. Republic of Georgia

On November 30, 2012, prior to the constitution of an Arbitral Tribunal, the ICSID Secretariat received a letter from the Claimant, requesting the discontinuance of the proceeding pursuant to ICSID Arbitration Rule 44. Respondent consented. The Secretary-General issued the order on discontinuance of the proceeding. Bidzina Ivanishvili v Republic of Georgia, ICSID Arbitration (No. ARB:12:27), […]

Türkiye Petrolleri Anonim Ortaklığı v. Republic of Kazakhstan

Türkiye Petrolleri Anonim Ortaklığı v. Republic of Kazakhstan

The proceeding was concluded and the award was rendered on August 18, 2014. The award is not publicly available. More information can be found here.

AIG Capital Partners, Inc. and CJSC Tema Real Estate Company v. Republic of Kazakhstan

AIG Capital Partners, Inc. and CJSC Tema Real Estate Company v. Republic of Kazakhstan

AIG Capital Partners arises out of a Request for Arbitration by AIG Capital Partners Inc  and CJSC Tema Real Estate Company requesting for arbitration of an “investment dispute” with the Republic of Kazakhstan. The claim in the Request for Arbitration arises out of the alleged expropriation of the Claimants‟ investment in a Real Estate Development […]

Anatolie Stati and Others v. Republic of Kazakhstan

Anatolie Stati and Others v. Republic of Kazakhstan

In Anatolie Stati and others, a Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC) Tribunal found that, through a “string of measures of coordinated harassment” of Claimants’ investments related to the Borankol and Tolkyn Fields and Munaibay Oil, to the Contract 302 Properties, and to the LPG Plant,” Kazakhstan violated the Fair and Equitable Treatment provision of the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT). As a […]

Hulley  Enterprises Limited (Cyprus) v. Russian Federation

Hulley Enterprises Limited (Cyprus) v. Russian Federation

Respondent filed the motion to dismiss petition to confirm arbitration awards for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the U.S. Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”). The motion was granted by the United States District Court, District of Columbia. Hulley Enterprises Limited v Russian Federation, PCA Arbitration (No. AA 226), Award dated 18 July 2014 Hulley Enterprises […]

Western NIS Enterprise Fund v. Ukraine

Western NIS Enterprise Fund v. Ukraine

Parties agreed to settle the case and proceeding was discontinued at their request. Order taking note of the discontinuance was issued by the Tribunal on June 1, 2006 pursuant to Arbitration Rule 43(1). Western NIS Enterprise Fund v Ukraine, ICSID Arbitration (No. ARB:04:2), Order dated 16 March 2006

Metal-Tech Ltd. v. Republic of Uzbekistan

Metal-Tech Ltd. v. Republic of Uzbekistan

In 2000, Metal-Tech, an Israeli public company manufacturing molybdenum products, formed a joint venture with two state-owned companies in Uzbekistan to build and operate a plant for the production of molybdenum products. Metal-Tech was to contribute its technology, know-how, and access to international markets, as well as part of the financing needed for a new […]

Caratube International Oil Company LLP v. Republic of Kazakhstan

Caratube International Oil Company LLP v. Republic of Kazakhstan

In Caratube v. Kazakhstan, the ad hoc ICSID annulment committee (the “Committee”) dismissed Caratube International Oil Company LLP’s (“CIOC”) application for annulment, finding that the ICSID tribunal (the “Tribunal”) did not (i) manifestly exceed its powers; (ii) seriously depart from a fundamental rule of procedure; or (iii) fail to state the reasons on which it based its decision, […]

Tribunal Requests Claimants to Disclose to Turkmenistan who is Paying for Their Lawsuit

Tribunal Requests Claimants to Disclose to Turkmenistan who is Paying for Their Lawsuit

Even though third party funding is increasingly common in international arbitration, the disclosure of funding arrangements is relatively rare and is required only in exceptional circumstances. Earlier this year in Muhammet Çap & Sehil Inşaat Endustri ve Ticaret Ltd. Sti v. Turkmenistan the ICSID tribunal issued an order to compel the parties to disclose third party funding arrangements. Brief […]