Warning! Javascript is disabled. Please enable javascript for a completly functioning application.

Investment Dispute Settlement Navigator

about
methodology

About

The UNCTAD Investment Dispute Settlement Navigator contains information about known international arbitration cases initiated by investors against States pursuant to international investment agreements (IIAs). Such arbitrations are also referred to as treaty-based investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) cases.

General disclaimer

The Navigator includes information about publicly known IIA-based international investor-State arbitration proceedings. As some proceedings (or certain aspects of proceedings) remain confidential, the information contained in the Navigator cannot be deemed exhaustive.

While every effort is made to keep the information up to date and complete, the material is provided without any guarantees or warranties as to its accuracy or completeness. UNCTAD assumes no responsibility for eventual errors or omissions in these data.

We welcome any additional information or clarifications on specific cases as well as suggestions to improve the Navigator. Please contact us using the online contact form.

Cases included in the Navigator

A case is included in the Navigator if it is:

  • an international arbitration between an investor and a State;
  • fully or partially based on an IIA, such as a bilateral investment treaty or the investment chapter of a free trade agreement (not included are investor-State disputes that are solely based on contracts or on domestic investment legislation);
  • submitted to arbitration through a notice of arbitration or a request for arbitration, and upon registration of such request if applicable (not included are cases where a disputing party has only notified the other party of the existence of a dispute or signalled its intention to submit a claim, but has not yet commenced the arbitration).

Sources of information and frequency of updating

The information included in the Navigator is collected from publicly available sources. Primary sources (i.e. official documents relating to the case and information provided by the administering institutions) are the main and preferred source of information. Secondary sources, such as specialized reporting services and other sources deemed reliable, are used to supplement primary sources and/or obtain case information otherwise unavailable.

The Navigator is updated on a regular, typically biannual, basis. The date of the last update is displayed on the Navigator’s home page.

Methodological notes for the recording of data

Case name

Full case name is recorded as it appears in the official case documents and as it is registered at the administering institution if applicable. If there are more than five claimants in the case, the names of all claimants can be replaced by the name of the first claimant followed by the words “and others”.

Short case name is ascribed by UNCTAD. Typically it is the first word of a corporate claimant’s name, an abbreviation of the corporate claimant’s name, or the last name of a natural-person claimant “v.” the short version of the respondent State’s name.

If the Navigator includes more than one case with the exact same name, then “(I)” is added to the case name of the earlier case, and a “(II)”, “(III)”, etc. is added to the name of each subsequent case.

Year of initiation

This is the year in which the notice of arbitration / request for arbitration was submitted by the claimant. For arbitrations brought under the ICSID Convention Arbitration Rules or ICSID Additional Facilities (AF) Rules, the year in which the claim was registered by ICSID is used.

Applicable IIA

This is the IIA(s) pursuant to which the claimant initiated the arbitral proceedings.

Arbitral rules

These are the arbitral rules in accordance with which the proceedings are conducted. Proceedings that are not subject to any existing set of arbitral rules, i.e. where the arbitral tribunal determines procedural rules, are marked “None (ad hoc)”.

Administering institution

This is the institution that provides administrative support for the arbitral proceedings. When the proceedings are subject to arbitral rules of a certain arbitral institution (e.g. SCC or ICC), the relevant institution administers that case. In ad hoc arbitrations or those that are subject to non-institutional arbitral rules (e.g. UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules), the parties may request any arbitral institution to administer their case (e.g. PCA). Proceedings may also be conducted without being administered by any institution.

Common abbreviations for administering institutions:

CRCICACairo Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration
ICCInternational Chamber of Commerce (International Court of Arbitration)
ICSIDInternational Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes
LCIALondon Court of International Arbitration
MCCIMoscow Chamber of Commerce and Industry
PCAPermanent Court of Arbitration
SCCStockholm Chamber of Commerce (Arbitration Institute)

Details of investment and summary of the dispute

The details of investment are presented as argued by the claimant, unless otherwise expressly identified by an arbitral tribunal in its decisions or awards.

The summary of the dispute describes in very general terms the conduct allegedly in breach of IIA obligations as argued by the claimant.

Economic sector and subsector

This refers to the economic sector to which the investment at issue allegedly belongs. The structure of economic activities follows the International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities, Rev.4 (UN ISIC Rev.4).

Status/Outcome of original proceedings

This refers to the current status of the original arbitration proceedings.

  • Decided in favour of State: the tribunal dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction or found that the respondent State has not committed any breach of the applicable IIA.
  • Decided in favour of investor: the tribunal found that the respondent State committed one or more breaches of the applicable IIA and awarded monetary compensation or non-pecuniary relief to the claimant investor.
  • Decided in favour of neither party (liability found but no damages awarded): the arbitral tribunal found that the respondent State committed one or more breaches of the applicable IIA but did not award monetary compensation or non-pecuniary relief to the claimant investor.
  • Settled: the disputing parties settled the case and the arbitral proceedings were discontinued for that reason.
  • Pending: the arbitration proceedings are pending. A case remains pending if any of the following elements remain to be decided: jurisdiction, liability (merits), compensation. The case remains pending, for instance, if a State is found to have breached one or more IIA obligations (liability) but no award on damages has been issued yet.
    Notes:
    • The Navigator only records treaty-based disputes or treaty-based aspects of "mixed" disputes. In treaty-based cases that are simultaneously contract-based or based on national investment law ("mixed" disputes), a case is deemed concluded (for purposes of the Navigator) if the tribunal dismissed the case on jurisdiction or finds no breach of the IIA, even if it proceeds to adjudicate the contract- or statutory-based claims.
    • Cases in which a final award has been rendered but which are later subject to follow-on (post-award) proceedings (e.g. ICSID annulment proceedings or domestic judicial review), are marked according to the outcome of the original arbitral proceeding (i.e. not as “Pending”).
  • Discontinued: the arbitration was discontinued for any reason other than due to a (known) settlement. This includes discontinuance as a result of non-payment of arbitration fees, in order to pursue litigation in another forum, or for any other reason (including for unknown reasons).

Arbitral decisions rendered

These are decisions rendered by an arbitral tribunal. Included are those decisions that concern the substance of the case and affect the final outcome. In particular, these include decisions (awards) on jurisdictional issues, liability (merits) and damages, including arbitrators’ individual opinions where these were issued. Discontinuance orders and settlement agreements are also recorded if such information is available.

Not included are any other (supplementary) arbitral decisions, e.g. concerning provisional measures or decisions regarding requests for disqualification of arbitrators. Similarly, procedural orders issued by arbitral tribunals are not included. To access a full list of documentation available with respect to a case, users are invited to use (i) the link to the case page on http://italaw.com, and/or (ii) links to the websites of governments and/or arbitral institutions provided in the “Additional information” section.

Amounts claimed and awarded

Amount claimed refers to the amount of monetary compensation claimed by the investor, not including interest, legal costs or costs of arbitration.

Amount awarded refers to the amount of monetary compensation awarded by the arbitral tribunal to the claimant, not including interest, legal costs or costs of arbitration.

For proceedings that end in a settlement, the amount of compensation that the State agreed to pay to the claimant under the terms of settlement (if known) is recorded in this section.

Amounts are recorded in the currency used by the claimant/tribunal. The list of currencies in the Navigator follows the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 4217 code list.

To enable comparisons between cases, all amounts are also converted to US dollars. For the purposes of such conversion, the OANDA Historical Currency Converter is being used; the date of conversion is the date of the document or other source from which the information was obtained (e.g. the date in which the request for arbitration containing this amount was submitted or the date of the final award).

Whenever possible, information about amounts claimed and awarded is obtained from primary sources such as the arbitration documents. Otherwise, it is derived from other publicly available sources that are deemed reliable. In some cases, the approximate amount may be recorded to give a broad indication of the dispute’s magnitude. As a general rule, a rounded figure (to the nearest hundred thousand) of the amount claimed or awarded is provided.

If the claimant provides more than one valuation of damages claimed, the highest of these amounts is recorded.

IIA breaches alleged and found

Information about breaches alleged is primarily derived from the claimant’s request of arbitration, claimant’s memorials and/or arbitral decisions. When the relevant case documentation is not publicly available, information about breaches alleged may be obtained from other public sources that are deemed reliable.

Information about breaches found is primarily derived from the arbitral decisions. When the relevant decision is not publicly available, information about breaches found may be obtained from other public sources that are deemed reliable.

Claims concerning expropriation are classified as “direct” or “indirect” according to the characterisation made by the claimant and/or the tribunal. Whenever a claimant or the tribunal refer to “expropriation”, without distinguishing between “direct” or “indirect”, such distinction is made on the basis of the factual background of the case and the context of the claimant’s claims and tribunal’s findings.

Composition of tribunal

These are individuals who serve as members of the arbitral tribunal adjudicating the dispute (arbitrators).

The disputing party (i.e. claimant or respondent) that appointed a particular arbitrator is also recorded insofar as information is available. Instances where the respondent failed to appoint an arbitrator, and the latter was appointed by an “appointing authority”, are not recorded separately (i.e. both types of appointment are recorded under “Appointed by / designated to Respondent” without further distinction).

In case an arbitrator has been replaced by another individual (e.g. as a result of resignation, disqualification or passing away), the names of both the previous and subsequent arbitrator are recorded.

Follow-on (post-award) proceedings

Follow-on (post-award) proceedings include three types of legal proceedings:

  • ICSID annulment proceedings;
  • Judicial review by national courts (set-aside proceedings); and
  • ICSID resubmission proceedings.

Initiation of a follow-on proceeding by either disputing party does not affect the field “Case Status/Outcome” of the original proceeding, until the follow-on proceeding is completed. For example, in a case where a final award has been rendered but it is later subject to a follow-on proceeding (e.g. ICSID annulment proceeding), the status of the case is marked according to the outcome of the original arbitral proceeding (i.e. not as “Pending”).

Decisions, judgments and/or awards rendered in the course of follow-on (post-award) proceedings, as well as any individual opinions appended to them, are recorded.

The composition of the ICSID ad hoc committees that adjudicate requests for annulment under the ICSID Convention is recorded.

Link to Italaw’s case page

The Italaw.com portal offers a wide collection of case documentation for many investor-State disputes. It makes available not only the main arbitral decisions, but also procedural orders, parties’ submissions, expert opinions and other types of documents.

A link to the relevant case page at http://italaw.com is provided where such page is available, so that users could browse all documents relating to the case at hand.

Additional information

This section provides links to sources of information used for gathering data for the case at hand or otherwise relevant to that case. These may include links to websites of arbitral/administering institutions, governments, international organisations, specialised reporting services (including subscription-based), media and other resources.

Number of cases as respondent State
1 60
Updated as of 31 December 2017

Poland - as home State

Clear selection
Loaded 7 out of 7 Show all
No. Year of
initiation
Short case
name
Summary Outcome of
original proceedings
Respondent
State
Home State
of investor
1 2016 Grot and others v. Moldova Zbigniew Piotr Grot, Grot Cimarron LLC, I.C.S. Laguardia SRL and Laguardia USA LLC v. Republic of Moldova (ICSID Case No. ARB/16/8) Moldova, Republic of - United States of America BIT (1993) ICSID ICSID Investment: Rights under lease agreements for agricultural land concluded with landowners for a 3-year period.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged unlawful termination of the lease agreements for agricultural land concluded by the claimants with the landowners in two villages in the north-east of Moldova. A year after the agreements had been concluded, the respective local city halls revoked the registration of the agreements due to the claimants’ alleged non-performance of their contractual obligations, and registered lease agreements with a different lessee for the same land plots.
Rights under lease agreements for agricultural land concluded with landowners for a 3-year period. Pending Moldova, Republic of United States of America

Poland
Primary: A - Agriculture, forestry and fishing 1 - Crop and animal production, hunting and related service activities Sands, P. - President

Fortier, L. Y. - Claimant

Knieper, R. - Respondent
10.00 mln USD Data not available Indirect expropriation

Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures
Pending None None None None None None None
2 2016 Muszynianka v. Slovakia Spółdzielnia Pracy Muszynianka v. Slovak Republic Poland - Slovakia BIT (1994) UNCITRAL Data not available Investment: Investments in mineral water production.

Summary: Claims arising out of the 2014 change to the Slovakian Constitution that forbade cross-border bulk transportation of drinking and mineral water derived from Slovak water sources and the rejection of the claimant’s application for a mineral water extraction permit. These actions allegedly frustrated the claimant’s venture to extract and transport (via pipeline) mineral water from a source in Slovakia to its bottling plant in a neighbouring town in Poland.
Investments in mineral water production. Pending Slovakia Poland Secondary: C - Manufacturing 11 - Manufacture of beverages Alexandrov, S. A. - Claimant (replaced)

Thomas, J. C. - Respondent

Kaufmann-Kohler, G. - President

Volterra, R. - Claimant
75.00 mln EUR (82.50 mln USD) Data not available Data not available Pending None None None None None None None
3 2014 Aleksandrowicz and Częścik v. Cyprus Robert Aleksandrowicz and Tomasz Częścik v. Cyprus Cyprus - Poland BIT (1992) SCC SCC Investment:

Summary: Claims arising out of measures taken by the Government in March 2013 in relation to the claimants’ bank accounts at the Bank of Cyprus.
Decided in favour of State Cyprus Poland Data not available Data not available Derains, Y. - President

Nappert, S. - Claimant

Giardina, A. - Respondent
4.20 mln EUR (4.40 mln USD) Data not available Indirect expropriation None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Award dated 21 February 2017 None None None None None None
4 2012 Maiman and others v. Egypt Yosef Maiman, Merhav (MNF), Merhav-Ampal Group, Merhav-Ampal Energy Holdings v. Arab Republic of Egypt (PCA Case No. 2012/26) Egypt - Poland BIT (1995) UNCITRAL PCA Investment: Shareholding in EMG, a company that had concluded a 15 year contract with the Egyptian General Petroleum Corporation and the Egyptian Natural Gas Holdings to resell Egyptian natural gas.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged Government's failure to protect a gas pipeline in which the claimants had invested from attacks that took place during the Arab Spring.
Shareholding in EMG, a company that had concluded a 15 year contract with the Egyptian General Petroleum Corporation and the Egyptian Natural Gas Holdings to resell Egyptian natural gas. Pending Egypt Poland Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply McRae, D. M. - President

Reisman, W. M. - Claimant

Thomas, J. C. - Respondent
1100.00 mln USD Data not available Indirect expropriation

Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

Full protection and security, or similar

Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures

Umbrella clause
Pending Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility dated 5 May 2016 None None None None None None
5 2007 Europe Cement v. Turkey Europe Cement Investment and Trade S.A. v. Republic of Turkey (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/07/2) The Energy Charter Treaty (1994) ICSID AF ICSID Investment: Minority shareholding in two Turkish utilities companies that had concluded electricity concession agreements with the Turkish Ministry of Energy.

Summary: Claims arising out of the seizure of two Turkish utility companies, Cukarova Elektrik Anonim Sirketi and Kepez Elektrik Turk Anonim Sirketi, in respect of which the claimant held shares and the cancellation of electricity generation and distribution concession agreements between the latter two entities and Turkey.
Minority shareholding in two Turkish utilities companies that had concluded electricity concession agreements with the Turkish Ministry of Energy. Decided in favour of State Turkey Poland Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply McRae, D. M. - President

Lew, J. D. M. - Claimant

Lévy, L. - Respondent
3800.00 mln USD Data not available Indirect expropriation

Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims
None - jurisdiction declined Award dated 13 August 2009 None None None None None None
6 2006 Cementownia v. Turkey (I) Cementownia “Nowa Huta” S.A. v. Republic of Turkey (I) (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/06/2) The Energy Charter Treaty (1994) ICSID AF ICSID Investment: Shareholding in two Turkish hydroelectric companies, Cukurova Elektrik A.S. and Kepez Elektrik Türk A.S., that had concluded concession agreements with the Government for the generation, transmission, distribution and marketing of electricity.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged unilateral termination of certain concession agreements by the Turkish government, followed by the alleged seizure and expropriation of assets of the two hydroelectric plants in which the claimant had invested without compensation.
Shareholding in two Turkish hydroelectric companies, Cukurova Elektrik A.S. and Kepez Elektrik Türk A.S., that had concluded concession agreements with the Government for the generation, transmission, distribution and marketing of electricity. Decided in favour of State Turkey Poland Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply Tercier, P. - President

Lalonde, M. - Claimant

Thomas, J. C. - Respondent
4648.00 mln USD Data not available Direct expropriation

Full protection and security, or similar

Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures
None - jurisdiction declined Award dated 17 September 2009 None None None None None None
7 2006 Cementownia v. Turkey (II) Cementownia “Nowa Huta” S.A. (Poland) and Polska Energetyka Holding S.A. (Poland) v. Republic of Turkey (II) Poland - Turkey BIT (1991) UNCITRAL None Investment: Ownership of several assets and companies formerly owned by members of the Uzan family.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation by Turkey Savings Deposit Insurance Fund of several assets and companies formerly owned by members of the Uzan family, as part of Turkey's fraud case against such family and in an effort to satisfy creditors of an Uzan-owned financial institution, Imar Bank.
Ownership of several assets and companies formerly owned by members of the Uzan family. Discontinued Turkey Poland Tertiary: K - Financial and insurance activities 64 - Financial service activities, except insurance and pension funding Williams, D. A. R. - President

Brower, C. N. - Claimant

Mayer, P. - Respondent
4800.00 mln USD Data not available Data not available Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability Award dated 2009 None None None None None None