Investor-State Arbitration

TSIKinvest LLC v. Republic of Moldova

TSIKinvest LLC v. Republic of Moldova

An investor filed the emergency arbitration proceeding against Moldova.online pharmacy https://www.phamatech.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/new/prednisone.html no prescription drugstore  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.online pharmacy https://www.phamatech.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/new/lexapro.html no prescription drugstore The emergency arbitrator stayed Moldova’s attempts […]

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.online pharmacy https://www.mydentalplace.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/new/zoloft.html no prescription drugstore The arbitration proceeded under the UNCITRAL Arbitration rules. The Tribunal decided in favour of the investor and […]

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.online pharmacy http://miamihealth.com/images/jpg/antabuse.html no prescription drugstore The tribunal rendered the decision on 31 January 2006 in favour of the State.online pharmacy http://miamihealth.com/images/jpg/amoxicillin.html no prescription drugstore The award is available […]

Moldova: a Summary of Investment Arbitration History
By 23 September, 2016 0 Comments Read More →

Moldova: a Summary of Investment Arbitration History

The Republic of Moldova is a party to numerous multilateral investment treaties including the Energy Charter Treaty (“ECT“) and the ICSID Convention, which came into force for Moldova on 4 June 2011. Moldova has also signed bilateral investment treaties (“BITs“) with 43 countries. This article presents a short overview of known investor-state cases brought against Moldova. Cases initiated by Yuri Bogdanov  Russian citizen […]

Kiev Arbitration Days 2016: Think Big! (KAD-2016)

Kiev Arbitration Days 2016: Think Big! (KAD-2016)

  Kiev Arbitration Days 2016: Think Big! Ukrainian Bar Association is happy to announce the next Kiev Arbitration Days 2016: Think Big! (KAD-2016) which will take place on 3 November 2016 in Radisson Blu Hotel, Kiev, Ukraine. The conference is conducted under the auspices of the Ukrainian Bar Association. KAD-2016 will bring together world-class dispute resolution […]

Counterclaims in Oxus Gold v Uzbekistan: Is Investor-State Arbitration Still a One-Way Road?

Counterclaims in Oxus Gold v Uzbekistan: Is Investor-State Arbitration Still a One-Way Road?

The arbitral tribunal in Oxus Gold Plc v The Republic of Uzbekistan in the final award that became publicly available in April 2016 rejected all counterclaims raised by the host state against the British investor. The award, rendered by Prof Pierre Tercier, Prof Brigitte Stern and Hon Marc Lalonde (issuing partial dissent on another legal issue) […]

Opposite Results in Two SCC Emergency Arbitrations (Evrobalt v Moldova and Kompozit v Moldova)

Opposite Results in Two SCC Emergency Arbitrations (Evrobalt v Moldova and Kompozit v Moldova)

Two recent Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (“SCC“) emergency arbitration awards in investment arbitrations against the Republic of Moldova, with different conclusions based on a similar factual and legal background, inject uncertainty regarding the interpretation of conditions for granting interim relief in investment arbitration, while reaffirming positions on certain long-debated issues. Practical implications The messages to […]

Interim Relief Against the Host State: Analysis of Emergency Awards against Moldova

Interim Relief Against the Host State: Analysis of Emergency Awards against Moldova

Applications for interim relief have become a frequently used procedural tool among foreign investors arbitrating against CIS states. Emergency arbitration proceedings under the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC) Arbitration Rules are particularly in demand: at least four applications for interim reliefs against CIS states have been filed since 2014 (TSIKInvest v Republic of Moldova; JKX Oil & […]

Kompozit LLC v Republic of Moldova (SCC Emergency Arbitration)

Kompozit LLC v Republic of Moldova (SCC Emergency Arbitration)

In June 2016 Kompozit LLC, a Russian shareholder of JSC Moldova Agroindbank (MAIB)  applied for interim relief from SCC Emergency Arbitrator Mr. José Rosell. The dispute arose out of the actions by the National Bank of Moldova impairing the Claimant’s shareholding in MAIB: finding that Claimant failed to receive its approval of obtaining substantive shareholding, subsequent suspension of its shareholding […]

Recent Investment Arbitration Cases involving CIS States

Recent Investment Arbitration Cases involving CIS States

While the spotlight of the CIS arbitration community is currently focused on investment disputes between Ukrainian claimants and the Russian Federation, moving to jurisdictional phase in mid-July 2016, other CIS states have also provided some noteworthy developments. This post highlights general trends identified in CIS-related Investor-State Dispute Settlement (“ISDS“) since 2015, and addresses certain cases that […]

Russia losing battles but winning wars with foreign investors: cases overview

Russia losing battles but winning wars with foreign investors: cases overview

More often than not, foreign investors reach some success in arbitration cases against Russia. However, obtaining ultimate remuneration for their efforts usually becomes a long and evasive target, because the award either gets annulled or faces insurmountable enforcement difficulties. Many international treaties of the Russian Federation including those concluded by the USSR as its legal predecessor include a “narrow” […]

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. online pharmacy https://www.gcbhllc.org/image/png/synthroid.html no prescription İçkale İnşaat Limited Şirketi v. Turkmenistan (ICSID Case No. […]

More Parties include ICC Arbitration Clauses, the Number of CIS Disputes Rising
By 22 December, 2015 0 Comments Read More →

More Parties include ICC Arbitration Clauses, the Number of CIS Disputes Rising

CIS Arbitration Forum continues its series of interviews with representatives of major international arbitration institutions working on disputes related to Russia and the CIS region. This month we interviewed Andrea Carlevaris who serves as Secretary General of the ICC International Court of Arbitration and Director of Dispute Resolution Services of the ICC. Mr Carlevaris spoke […]

Enforceability of Emergency Arbitrator Awards in Ukraine

Enforceability of Emergency Arbitrator Awards in Ukraine

In an earlier post the CIS Arbitration Forum reported on three investment treaty claims which have been initiated this year against Ukraine in the gas sector. In one of them a UK-based energy company, JKX Oil & Gas, and its Dutch and Ukrainian subsidiaries, Poltava Gas B.V. and JV Poltava Petroleum Company, obtained the first ever emergency arbitration award against […]

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.online pharmacy https://kendrickfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/new/diflucan.html no prescription drugstore The tribunal […]

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.online pharmacy https://www.childhealthonline.org/scripts/js/desyrel.html no prescription drugstore This was a part of Estonia’s privatisation of AS Tallinna Vesi. The privatisation was sponsored and closely supervised by the European Bank for […]

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.online pharmacy https://www.3-dmed.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/jpg/ventolin.html no prescription drugstore Bidzina Ivanishvili v Republic of […]

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”).online pharmacy https://www.phamatech.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/new/desyrel.html no prescription drugstore 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 […]

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.online pharmacy https://www.arborvita.com/wp-content/themes/spacious/inc/new/amoxicillin.html no prescription drugstore 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.online pharmacy https://www.phamatech.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/new/albuterol.html no prescription drugstore Metal-Tech was to contribute its technology, know-how, and access to international markets, as well as part of the […]

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 […]

Consent to Treaty Arbitration Should be Specific, not General

Consent to Treaty Arbitration Should be Specific, not General

Recently investors vigorously but unsuccessfully tried to revive an arbitral award against the Kyrgyz Republic in the Russian courts. On 20 July 2015 the Arbitrazh Court of the Moscow Circuit rejected the cassation claim of companies Stans Energy Corp. and Kutisay Mining and upheld the ruling of the Arbitrazh Court of the first instance. The court upheld […]

Stans Energy and Kutisay Mining v. Republic of Kyrgyzstan

Stans Energy and Kutisay Mining v. Republic of Kyrgyzstan

Kutisay & Stans Energy v Kyrgyz Republic, Moscow Arbitration, Award Annulment, Decision dated 27 July 2015  

The Yukos Arbitration Decision in a Nutshell

The Yukos Arbitration Decision in a Nutshell

Here is a short summary of the most important points of the Yukos arbitration award which former shareholders are now trying to enforce in Belgium, France and other European countries. Diana Bentley of Lexis Nexis interviewed Yaraslau Kryvoi. What was the dispute about? The tribunal, the Permanent Court for Arbitration, constituted under UNCITRAL Rules and based in […]

Yukos Award – Beginning of a New Enforcement Saga

Yukos Award – Beginning of a New Enforcement Saga

While the recent agreement between Yukos shareholders and Rosneft settles all litigation disputes between them, it does not solve the existing disputes between Yukos and Russia as a state, in particular the $50 billion arbitration award made by the PCA in The Hague in 2014. As Russia refuses to voluntarily comply with the award, Yukos […]

Arbitrations against Ukraine and its State Bodies in Post-Revolution Period

Arbitrations against Ukraine and its State Bodies in Post-Revolution Period

2014 was one of the most difficult years in the contemporary history of Ukraine in both political and economic terms. The country lived through the Revolution of Dignity in February, the annexation of Crimea in March, the ongoing military conflict in eastern Ukraine and deep financial and economic crisis. In order to counter these difficulties and to […]

French Judgment Unenforceable Because of Lack of Legal Certainty

French Judgment Unenforceable Because of Lack of Legal Certainty

In January 2015 the Russian Supreme Court refused to enforce the Resolution of Paris Appellate Court No. RG 09/19535 dated 18 November 2010 on the collection of EUR 150,000 from the Government of Kaliningrad Region for the Republic of Lithuania. The case highlights the importance of a foreign judge giving reasons in a clear way in order for the decision to be […]

Russian Courts Reject Overly Broad Interpretation of Investment Treaty Arbitration Clause

Russian Courts Reject Overly Broad Interpretation of Investment Treaty Arbitration Clause

Arbitral tribunals in Moscow interpreted surprisingly broadly the dispute resolution provision in an investment treaty, allowing the investors to apply at unlimited number of fora at their choice. However, the Minsk-based CIS Economic Court in its decision on 23 September clarified that such provision establishes only a potential possibility of investor-state dispute resolution by international arbitration provided that the […]

The Court of the Eurasian Economic Community is Tackling Challenges of the Eurasian Integration

The Court of the Eurasian Economic Community is Tackling Challenges of the Eurasian Integration

The Eurasian Economic Community (“EurAsEC”) was founded in 2000 by Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan. EurAsEC is an international organisation established to promote the process of the effective formation of the Customs Union and the Common Economic Space, as well as of other goals and objectives related to the deepening of integration in the […]

Yukos Winning Award: Will Russia Avoid Arbitral Enforcement Again?

Yukos Winning Award: Will Russia Avoid Arbitral Enforcement Again?

On 28 July 2014 a historic award in Yukos v. The Russian Federation rendered by the arbitral tribunal seated in The Hague finally became publicly available. The tribunal ordered Russia to pay more than 50 billion US$ for its expropriation of Yukos, making this award the biggest one in the history of international arbitration. Considering the circumstances, […]

Russian Arbitration Day 2014: Arbitration in Russia Undergoing Turbulence

Russian Arbitration Day 2014: Arbitration in Russia Undergoing Turbulence

The international conference Russian Arbitration Day took place on 29 May in Moscow.  The event focused on key issues concerning the development of international commercial arbitration on Post-Soviet territory. It was the second such conference held by the International Commercial Arbitration Court at the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation. A number […]

Kyrgyz Republic’s Mixed Fortunes in Investment Arbitration

Kyrgyz Republic’s Mixed Fortunes in Investment Arbitration

The Kyrgyz Republic found itself on the receiving end of a flurry of investment arbitration claims a couple of years ago. While it has since successfully resolved a number of cases, it has also lost several times. This post looks at two important recent developments. The first one is three awards rendered against the Kyrgyz […]

Turkmenistan: Two Recent Decisions on Jurisdiction Prove that the BIT Matters
By 22 October, 2013 0 Comments Read More →

Turkmenistan: Two Recent Decisions on Jurisdiction Prove that the BIT Matters

This summer ICSID tribunals resolved jurisdictional challenges in two cases arising out of construction projects in Turkmenistan. In Kilic Insaat Ithalat Ihracat Sanayi ve Ticaret Anonim Sirketi v Turkmenistan (ICSID Case No. ARB/10/1) the tribunal decided that it does not have jurisdiction. It held that the investor failed to litigate its claims in the Turkmen courts […]