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 59

Canada - as home State

Clear selection
Loaded 44 out of 44 Show all
No. Year of
initiation
Short case
name
Summary Outcome of
original proceedings
Respondent
State
Home State
of investor
1 2016 Alhambra v. Kazakhstan Alhambra Resources Ltd. and Alhambra Coӧperatief U.A. v. Republic of Kazakhstan (ICSID Case No. ARB/16/12) Kazakhstan - Netherlands BIT (2002) ICSID ICSID Investment: Rights under two gold mining licences held by the claimants’ local subsidiary, Joint Venture Saga Creek Gold Company LLP, and an exploration and exploitation contract with the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Summary: Claims arising out of an allegedly unlawful assessment of taxes on the claimants’ local subsidiary Saga Creek, the withholding of required mining and financing approvals and other actions of the Government, which allegedly culminated in the bankruptcy of Saga Creek in 2015.
Rights under two gold mining licences held by the claimants’ local subsidiary, Joint Venture Saga Creek Gold Company LLP, and an exploration and exploitation contract with the Republic of Kazakhstan. Pending Kazakhstan Netherlands

Canada
Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 7 - Mining of metal ores van Houtte, H. - President

Beechey, J. - Claimant

Kalicki, J. E. - Respondent
100.00 mln USD Data not available Data not available Pending None None None None None None None
2 2016 Eco Oro v. Colombia Eco Oro Minerals Corp. v. Republic of Colombia (ICSID Case No. ARB/16/41) Canada-Colombia FTA ICSID ICSID Investment: Mining rights held under a concession contract, comprising the Angostura gold and silver deposit in the Santurbán region of northeastern Colombia.

Summary: Claims arising out of the National Mining Agency’s decision (2016) that deprived the claimant of its mining rights in respect of 50% of the concession area (a gold and silver deposit) held by it since the mid-1990s. The relevant area was found to fall within the Santurbán Páramo, an environmental conservation zone. The Mining Agency’s actions followed the decision of Colombia’s Constitutional Court that broadened restrictions on mining in high-mountain ecosystems known as páramos (sources of the country’s freshwater supply), striking down legal provisions that had stabilised the rights of mining projects in those areas negotiated before 2010.
Mining rights held under a concession contract, comprising the Angostura gold and silver deposit in the Santurbán region of northeastern Colombia. Pending Colombia Canada Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 7 - Mining of metal ores Data not available Data not available Data not available Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

Indirect expropriation
Pending None None None None None None None
3 2016 Gold Pool v. Kazakhstan Gold Pool Limited Partnership v. Republic of Kazakhstan Canada - Russian Federation BIT (1989) UNCITRAL Data not available Investment: Management contract rights to operate certain gold mines in Kazakhstan.

Summary: Claims arising out of the allegedly wrongful termination in 1997 of the claimant’s management contract rights to operate certain gold mines in Kazakhstan.
Management contract rights to operate certain gold mines in Kazakhstan. Pending Kazakhstan Canada Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 7 - Mining of metal ores van den Berg, A. J. - President

Williams, D. A. R. - Claimant

Bottini, G. - Respondent
Data not available Data not available Data not available Pending None None None None None None None
4 2016 TransCanada v. USA TransCanada Corporation and TransCanada PipeLines Limited v. United States of America (ICSID Case No. ARB/16/21) NAFTA ICSID ICSID Investment: Interests in the Keystone XL Pipeline project; ownership and/or control of nine U.S. enterprises, including TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, L.P. (“Keystone”), and other assets.

Summary: Claims arising out of the denial of the application for a Presidential Permit to construct the Keystone XL Pipeline, a proposed 1,897 km crude oil pipeline from Alberta (Canada) to Nebraska (United States), and the Government’s actions leading to that denial.
Interests in the Keystone XL Pipeline project; ownership and/or control of nine U.S. enterprises, including TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, L.P. (“Keystone”), and other assets. Pending United States of America Canada Tertiary: H - Transportation and storage

Tertiary: F - Construction
49 - Land transport and transport via pipelines

42 - Civil engineering
Haigh, D. - Claimant

Murphy, S. D. - Respondent

Name not available - President
15000.00 mln USD (15000.00 mln USD) Data not available National treatment

Most-favoured nation treatment

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

Indirect expropriation
Pending None None None None None None None
5 2015 Gabriel Resources v. Romania Gabriel Resources Ltd. and Gabriel Resources (Jersey) v. Romania (ICSID Case No. ARB/15/31) Canada - Romania BIT (2009)

Romania - United Kingdom BIT (1995)
ICSID ICSID Investment: Majority shareholding in Rosia Montana Gold Corporation, a Romanian mining company, co-owned with a State-owned entity.

Summary: Claims arising out of the allegedly discriminatory measures relating to the approval of an environmental impact assessment and the issuance of an environmental permit required to start exploitation of the claimant's mining project.
Majority shareholding in Rosia Montana Gold Corporation, a Romanian mining company, co-owned with a State-owned entity. Pending Romania Canada

United Kingdom
Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 7 - Mining of metal ores Alexandrov, S. A. - Claimant (replaced)

Douglas, Z. - Respondent

Cheng, T. - President

Grigera Naón, H. A. - Claimant
Data not available Data not available Data not available Pending None None None None None None None
6 2015 LMC v. Mexico Lion Mexico Consolidated L.P. v. United Mexican States (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/15/2) NAFTA ICSID AF ICSID Investment: Promissory notes and mortgages over three properties located in Mexico.

Summary: Claims arising out of Mexican authorities’ cancellation of promissory notes held by the claimant and mortgages to which the claimant was a beneficiary.
Promissory notes and mortgages over three properties located in Mexico. Pending Mexico Canada Tertiary: F - Construction 41 - Construction of buildings Fernández-Armesto, J. - President

Cairns, D. J. A. - Claimant

Ramírez Hernández, R. - Respondent
200.00 mln USD Data not available Indirect expropriation

Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims
Pending Decision on the Respondent’s preliminary objection under Art. 45(6) of the ICSID Arbitration (Additional Facilities) Rules dated 12 December 2016 None None None None None None
7 2015 Lumina Copper v. Poland Lumina Copper v. Republic of Poland Canada - Poland BIT (1990) Data not available Data not available Investment: Ownership of Miedzi Copper Corp. that holds a number of copper exploration concessions in Poland.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged revocation of two copper exploitation permits awarded to the claimant’s local subsidiary Miedzi Copper and the subsequent allocation of the permits to Poland’s largest copper producer KGHM.
Ownership of Miedzi Copper Corp. that holds a number of copper exploration concessions in Poland. Pending Poland Canada Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 7 - Mining of metal ores Kaufmann-Kohler, G. - President

Fortier, L. Y. - Claimant

Dolzer, R. - Respondent
100.00 mln USD Data not available Data not available Pending None None None None None None None
8 2015 Stans Energy v. Kyrgyzstan (II) Stans Energy Corp. and Kutisay Mining LLC v. Kyrgyz Republic (II) CIS Investor Rights Convention (1997) UNCITRAL PCA Investment: Indirect ownership by Stans Energy Corp. of Kutisay Mining LLC that held a licence for mining rare earth, bismuth, molybdenum and silver at the “Kutessay II” deposit.

Summary: Claims arising out of a series of measures by the Government which allegedly resulted in the impossibility to carry out activities on the mineral deposit “Kutessay II” in accordance with the mining license previously granted to Kutisay Mining LLC.
Indirect ownership by Stans Energy Corp. of Kutisay Mining LLC that held a licence for mining rare earth, bismuth, molybdenum and silver at the “Kutessay II” deposit. Pending Kyrgyzstan Canada Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 7 - Mining of metal ores Böckstiegel, K.-H. - President

Campbell, C. L. - Claimant

Jagusch, S. - Respondent
Data not available Data not available Indirect expropriation Pending None None None None None None None
9 2014 Bear Creek Mining v. Peru Bear Creek Mining Corporation v. Republic of Peru (ICSID Case No. ARB/14/21) Canada-Peru FTA ICSID ICSID Investment: Rights under a concession agreement concluded with the claimant to operate the Santa Ana silver mining site in Peru.

Summary: Claims arising out of the enactment by the Government of Supreme Decree 032 that revoked claimant's concession to operate the Santa Ana mining project in Peru on the ground that it was no longer in the national interest, resulting in a complete cease of activities at Santa Ana and alleged significant damages to the claimant.
Rights under a concession agreement concluded with the claimant to operate the Santa Ana silver mining site in Peru. Pending Peru Canada Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 7 - Mining of metal ores Böckstiegel, K.-H. - President

Pryles, M. C. - Claimant

Sands, P. - Respondent
1200.00 mln USD Data not available Direct expropriation Pending None None None None None None None
10 2014 EuroGas v. Slovakia EuroGas Inc. and Belmont Resources Inc. v. Slovak Republic (ICSID Case No. ARB/14/14) Slovakia - United States of America BIT (1991)

Canada - Slovakia BIT (2010)
ICSID ICSID Investment: Majority shareholding (90 per cent) in Rozmina, a Slovakian company that held an exclusive right to carry out talc mining activities in Slovakia.

Summary: Claims arising out of the revocation of claimants' exclusive rights for mining activities at the Gemerska Poloma talc deposit allegedly without compensation, despite three decisions of Slovakia's Supreme Court declaring such action illegal.
Majority shareholding (90 per cent) in Rozmina, a Slovakian company that held an exclusive right to carry out talc mining activities in Slovakia. Pending Slovakia Canada

United States of America
Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 8 - Other mining and quarrying Mayer, P. - President

Gaillard, E. - Claimant

Stern, B. - Respondent
500.00 mln EUR (655.00 mln USD) Data not available National treatment

Most-favoured nation treatment

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

Direct expropriation

Indirect expropriation

Umbrella clause
Pending None None None None None None None
11 2014 Infinito Gold v. Costa Rica Infinito Gold Ltd. v. Republic of Costa Rica (ICSID Case No. ARB/14/5) Canada - Costa Rica BIT (1998) ICSID ICSID Investment: Rights under an exploration permit and an exploitation concession for the development of a gold mine in Costa Rica, known as Las Crucitas Project.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s revocation of claimant's concession for a gold mining project at Crucitas de Cutris, in northern Costa Rica, through alleged court and executive measures without payment of adequate compensation.
Rights under an exploration permit and an exploitation concession for the development of a gold mine in Costa Rica, known as Las Crucitas Project. Pending Costa Rica Canada Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 7 - Mining of metal ores Kaufmann-Kohler, G. - President

Hanotiau, B. - Claimant

Stern, B. - Respondent
93.80 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

National treatment

Most-favoured nation treatment

Other
Pending None None None None None None None
12 2013 Stans Energy v. Kyrgyzstan (I) Stans Energy Corp. and Kutisay Mining LLC v. Kyrgyz Republic (I) CIS Investor Rights Convention (1997) MCCI MCCI Investment: Indirect ownership by Stans Energy Corp. of Kutisay Mining LLC that held a licence for mining rare earth, bismuth, molybdenum and silver at the “Kutessay II” deposit.

Summary: Claims arising out of a series of measures by the Government which allegedly resulted in the impossibility to carry out activities on the mineral deposit “Kutessay II” in accordance with the mining license previously granted to Kutisay Mining LLC.
Indirect ownership by Stans Energy Corp. of Kutisay Mining LLC that held a licence for mining rare earth, bismuth, molybdenum and silver at the “Kutessay II” deposit. Decided in favour of investor Kyrgyzstan Canada Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 7 - Mining of metal ores Vilkova, N. - Claimant

Balayan, L. - Respondent

Pak, M. Z. - President
117.80 mln USD 117.80 mln USD Indirect expropriation Indirect expropriation Award dated 30 June 2014 None Judicial review by national courts Award/decision set aside in its entirety (Judicial review by national courts) Judgment of the Moscow Arbitrazh Court on Application to Set Aside Award dated 25 May 2015 (Judicial review by national courts) None None
13 2013 WWM v. Kazakhstan World Wide Minerals v. Republic of Kazakhstan Canada - Russian Federation BIT (1989) UNCITRAL Data not available Investment: Rights under a contract concluded with the Government to operate one of Kazakhstan's largest uranium-processing facilities.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's alleged failure to observe its contractual obligations, including the granting of an export license to WWM to market Kazakh uranium internationally, which allegedly led the claimant to suspend operations at its Kazakh facility and resulted in the bankruptcy, confiscation and forced sale of its local assets.
Rights under a contract concluded with the Government to operate one of Kazakhstan's largest uranium-processing facilities. Pending Kazakhstan Canada Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 7 - Mining of metal ores Park, W. W. - President

Berman, F. - Claimant

Crook, J. R. - Respondent
Data not available Data not available Data not available Pending Decision on Jurisdiction dated 19 October 2015 None None None None None None
14 2012 Apotex v. USA (III) Apotex Holdings Inc. and Apotex Inc. v. United States of America (III) (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/12/1) NAFTA ICSID AF ICSID Investment: Indirect ownership and control of an American-based Apotex affiliate engaged in the distribution of generic drugs.

Summary: Claims arising out of alleged injuries from "Import Alerts" issued by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration concerning two of Apotex’s Canadian manufacturing facilities.
Indirect ownership and control of an American-based Apotex affiliate engaged in the distribution of generic drugs. Decided in favour of State United States of America Canada Secondary: C - Manufacturing 21 - Manufacture of basic pharmaceutical products and pharmaceutical preparations Veeder, V. V. - President

Rowley, J. W. - Claimant

Crook, J. R. - Respondent
1500.00 mln USD Data not available Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

National treatment

Most-favoured nation treatment
None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Award dated 25 August 2014 None None None None None None
15 2012 Rusoro Mining v. Venezuela Rusoro Mining Ltd. v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/12/5) Canada - Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of BIT (1996) ICSID AF ICSID Investment: Ownership of 24 Venezuelan subsidiaries holding a total of 58 mining concessions and contracts for the exploration and exploitation of gold in Venezuela.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's enactment of a series of measures that allegedly dismantled the legal regime for the marketing of gold in Venezuela and culminated in the nationalisation and control of Rusoro’s investments in Venezuela without compensation.
Ownership of 24 Venezuelan subsidiaries holding a total of 58 mining concessions and contracts for the exploration and exploitation of gold in Venezuela. Decided in favour of investor Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Canada Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 7 - Mining of metal ores Fernández-Armesto, J. - President

Orrego Vicuña, F. - Claimant

Simma, B. - Respondent
2318.90 mln USD 967.80 mln USD Direct expropriation

Indirect expropriation

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

Full protection and security, or similar

National treatment

Performance requirements

Transfer of funds
Direct expropriation

Performance requirements
Decision on the Respondent’s request to address the objections to jurisdiction as a preliminary question dated 16 July 2013

Award dated 22 August 2016
None None None None None None
16 2011 Copper Mesa v. Ecuador Copper Mesa Mining Corporation v. Republic of Ecuador (PCA No. 2012-2) Canada - Ecuador BIT (1996) UNCITRAL PCA Investment: Concession rights held through local subsidiaries for two open-pit mines located in the Junín and Chaucha regions of Ecuador; right of acquisition over a third mining project in the area of Telinbela.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged termination by the Government of mining concessions in the Ecuadorian areas of Junín, Chaucha and Telinbela, in which the claimant had invested.
Concession rights held through local subsidiaries for two open-pit mines located in the Junín and Chaucha regions of Ecuador; right of acquisition over a third mining project in the area of Telinbela. Decided in favour of investor Ecuador Canada Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 7 - Mining of metal ores Veeder, V. V. - President

Cremades, B. M. - Claimant

Simma, B. - Respondent
69.70 mln USD 19.40 mln USD Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

Full protection and security, or similar

National treatment

Direct expropriation

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

Full protection and security, or similar

Indirect expropriation

Direct expropriation
Award dated 15 March 2016 None None None None None None
17 2011 Crystallex v. Venezuela Crystallex International Corporation v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/11/2) Canada - Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of BIT (1996) ICSID AF ICSID Investment: Rights under a mine operation contract; capital contributions of over USD 300 million.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's termination of claimant's mine operation contract over a gold deposit situated in Las Cristinas, after it refused to issue an environmental permit allowing extraction to initiate.
Rights under a mine operation contract; capital contributions of over USD 300 million. Decided in favour of investor Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Canada Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 7 - Mining of metal ores Lévy, L. - President

Gotanda, J. Y. - Claimant

Boisson de Chazournes, L. - Respondent

Feliciano, F. P. - Respondent (replaced)
3160.00 mln USD 1202.00 mln USD Indirect expropriation

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

Direct expropriation

Full protection and security, or similar
Indirect expropriation

Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims
Decision on the Respondent's request to address the objections to jurisdiction as a preliminary question dated 23 May 2012

Award dated 4 April 2016
None None None None None None
18 2011 Khan Resources v. Mongolia Khan Resources Inc., Khan Resources B.V. and Cauc Holding Company Ltd. v. the Government of Mongolia and Monatom Co., Ltd. The Energy Charter Treaty UNCITRAL PCA Investment: Majority shareholding in Mongolian joint venture subsidiary that held uranium mining and exploration licenses in Mongolia.

Summary: Claims arising out of Mongolia’s cancellation of claimant's mining and exploration licenses for a uranium deposit located in the Dornod province in northeastern Mongolia.
Majority shareholding in Mongolian joint venture subsidiary that held uranium mining and exploration licenses in Mongolia. Decided in favour of investor Mongolia Canada

Netherlands

British Virgin Islands
Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 7 - Mining of metal ores Williams, D. A. R. - President

Fortier, L. Y. - Claimant

Hanotiau, B. - Respondent
358.00 mln USD 80.00 mln USD 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
Umbrella clause Decision on Jurisdiction dated 25 July 2012

Award dated 2 March 2015
None Judicial review by national courts Pending (Judicial review by national courts) None None None
19 2011 Nova Scotia Power v. Venezuela (II) Nova Scotia Power Incorporated v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (II) (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/11/1) Canada - Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of BIT (1996) ICSID AF ICSID Investment: Rights under a coal supply agreement concluded between Nova Scotia Power and Guasare Coal International, an enterprise allegedly controlled by Venezuela.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged termination by the Government of Nova Scotia’s right to receive up to 1.7 million metric tons of coal at fixed prices from the Paso Diablo coal mine in Venezuela.
Rights under a coal supply agreement concluded between Nova Scotia Power and Guasare Coal International, an enterprise allegedly controlled by Venezuela. Decided in favour of State Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Canada Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 5 - Mining of coal and lignite van Houtte, H. - President

Williams, D. A. R. - Claimant

Vinuesa, R. E. - Respondent
180.00 mln USD Data not available Unclear None - jurisdiction declined Award dated 30 April 2014 None None None None None None
20 2011 Zamora Gold v. Ecuador Zamora Gold Corporation v. Ecuador Canada - Ecuador BIT (1996) UNCITRAL Data not available Investment: Shareholding in three mining subsidiaries, Mineral del Austro Mineraustro S.A, Minreal S.A, and Concumaysa Compania Minera Cumay del Ecuador S.A.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation of claimant's shares in three subsidiary companies engaged in the exploration and exploitation of mineral properties in Ecuador, pursuant to a resolution of the Ecuadorean Guarantee Deposit Agency.
Shareholding in three mining subsidiaries, Mineral del Austro Mineraustro S.A, Minreal S.A, and Concumaysa Compania Minera Cumay del Ecuador S.A. Pending Ecuador Canada Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 8 - Other mining and quarrying Data not available Data not available Data not available Data not available Pending None None None None None None None
21 2010 Allard v. Barbados Peter A. Allard v. The Government of Barbados (PCA Case No. 2012-06) Barbados - Canada BIT (1996) UNCITRAL PCA Investment: Ownership of a wildlife sanctuary consisting of 34-acre natural wetlands.

Summary: Claims arising out of alleged environmental damage and indirect expropriation by the Government of the Graeme Hall Nature Sanctuary, a wildlife sanctuary in Barbados owned by the claimant.
Ownership of a wildlife sanctuary consisting of 34-acre natural wetlands. Decided in favour of State Barbados Canada Tertiary: L - Real estate activities 68 - Real estate activities Griffith, G. - President

Newcombe, A. - Claimant

Reisman, W. M. - Respondent
29.00 mln CAD (21.70 mln USD) Data not available Indirect expropriation

Full protection and security, or similar

Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims
None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Award on Jurisdiction dated 13 June 2014

Award dated 27 June 2016
None None None None None None
22 2009 Apotex v. USA (II) Apotex Inc. v. The Government of the United States of America (II) NAFTA UNCITRAL ICSID Investment: Canadian pharmaceuticals corporation engaged in developing and manufacturing generic drugs.

Summary: Claims arising out of alleged errors committed by U.S. agencies and federal courts in interpreting federal law, in the course of the investor's efforts to bring new generic drugs to market in the United States.
Canadian pharmaceuticals corporation engaged in developing and manufacturing generic drugs. Decided in favour of State United States of America Canada Secondary: C - Manufacturing 21 - Manufacture of basic pharmaceutical products and pharmaceutical preparations Landau, T. - President

Davidson, C. F. - Claimant

Smith, F. M. - Respondent
8.00 mln USD Data not available Indirect expropriation

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

National treatment
None - jurisdiction declined Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility dated 14 June 2013 None None None None None None
23 2009 Gold Reserve v. Venezuela Gold Reserve Inc. v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/09/1) Canada - Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of BIT (1996) ICSID AF ICSID Investment: Mining rights held indirectly by claimant in Venezuela under the mining concessions known as the “Brisas Concession” and the “Unicornio Concession” for the extraction of gold, copper and molybdenum.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's alleged deprivation of claimant's rights in certain gold and copper project in Venezuela, following the issuance of an administrative ruling by the Ministry of the Environment declaring the nullity of certain construction permit and the subsequent termination of claimant's mining concessions.
Mining rights held indirectly by claimant in Venezuela under the mining concessions known as the “Brisas Concession” and the “Unicornio Concession” for the extraction of gold, copper and molybdenum. Decided in favour of investor Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Canada Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 7 - Mining of metal ores Bernardini, P. - President

Williams, D. A. R. - Claimant

Dupuy, P.-M. - Respondent
1735.00 mln USD 713.00 mln USD Indirect expropriation

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

Full protection and security, or similar

Most-favoured nation treatment
Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims Award dated 22 September 2014 None Judicial review by national courts Pending (Judicial review by national courts) None None None
24 2008 Apotex v.USA (I) Apotex Inc. v. United States of America (I) (ICSID Case No. UNCT/10/2) NAFTA UNCITRAL ICSID Investment: Canadian pharmaceuticals corporation engaged in developing and manufacturing generic drugs.

Summary: Claims arising out of alleged errors committed by U.S. agencies and federal courts in interpreting federal law, in the course of the investor's efforts to bring new generic drugs to market in the United States.
Canadian pharmaceuticals corporation engaged in developing and manufacturing generic drugs. Decided in favour of State United States of America Canada Secondary: C - Manufacturing 21 - Manufacture of basic pharmaceutical products and pharmaceutical preparations Landau, T. - President

Davidson, C. F. - Claimant

Smith, F. M. - Respondent
8.00 mln USD Data not available Indirect expropriation

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

National treatment
None - jurisdiction declined Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility dated 14 June 2013 None None None None None None
25 2008 Nova Scotia Power v. Venezuela (I) Nova Scotia Power Incorporated v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (I) Canada - Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of BIT (1996) UNCITRAL PCA Investment: Rights under a coal supply agreement concluded between Nova Scotia Power and Guasare Coal International, an enterprise allegedly controlled by Venezuela.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged Government's termination of Nova Scotia Power Incorporated’s right to receive up to 1.7 million metric tons of coal at fixed prices from the Paso Diablo coal mine in Venezuela.
Rights under a coal supply agreement concluded between Nova Scotia Power and Guasare Coal International, an enterprise allegedly controlled by Venezuela. Decided in favour of State Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Canada Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 5 - Mining of coal and lignite Fernández-Armesto, J. - President

Beechey, J. - Claimant

Hanotiau, B. - Claimant (replaced)

Sands, P. - Respondent
180.00 mln USD Data not available Data not available None - jurisdiction declined Award on Jurisdiction dated 22 April 2010

Award on Costs dated 30 August 2010
None None None None None None
26 2008 Quadrant Pacific v. Costa Rica Quadrant Pacific Growth Fund L.P. and Canasco Holdings Inc. v. Republic of Costa Rica (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/08/1) Canada - Costa Rica BIT (1998) ICSID ICSID Investment: Indirect controlling interests in five orange plantations in the Canton of "Los Chiles", located on the northern border of Costa Rica.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's alleged failure to enforce its laws for the protection of private property; particularly, its failure to address the continuing illegal trespass on claimants’ citrus farm holdings located in Costa Rica, causing damages to the investors' farm landholdings.
Indirect controlling interests in five orange plantations in the Canton of "Los Chiles", located on the northern border of Costa Rica. Discontinued Costa Rica Canada Primary: A - Agriculture, forestry and fishing 1 - Crop and animal production, hunting and related service activities Garro, A. M. - President

Cremades, B. M. - Claimant

Lowenfeld, A. F. - Respondent
20.00 mln USD Data not available Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

Full protection and security, or similar

National treatment

Most-favoured nation treatment
Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability Order taking note of the discontinuance of the proceeding issued by the Tribunal dated 27 October 2010, pursuant to ICSID Administrative and Financial Regulation 14(3)(d) None None None None None None
27 2007 Anderson v. Costa Rica Alasdair Ross Anderson and others v. Republic of Costa Rica (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/07/3) Canada - Costa Rica BIT (1998) ICSID AF ICSID Investment: Capital contributions in an illegal financial intermediation scheme operated by two Costa Rican individuals.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged Government's failure to provide proper vigilance and governmental regulatory supervision over the national financial system, which led the 137 individual claimants to lose their deposits made in a Costa Rican business acting under a Ponzi scheme.
Capital contributions in an illegal financial intermediation scheme operated by two Costa Rican individuals. Decided in favour of State Costa Rica Canada Tertiary: K - Financial and insurance activities 64 - Financial service activities, except insurance and pension funding Morelli Rico, S. - President

Salacuse, J. W. - Claimant

Vinuesa, R. E. - Respondent
405.00 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
None - jurisdiction declined Award dated 19 May 2010 None None None None None None
28 2007 Frontier v. Czech Republic Frontier Petroleum Services Ltd. v. The Czech Republic Canada - Czech Republic BIT (1990) UNCITRAL PCA Investment: Capital contributions to finance the purchase of assets of a bankrupt State-owned Czech aircraft manufacturing company under certain unanimous shareholder agreement; claims to money in the form of an arbitral award in Frontier's favor.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged wrongful failure of Czech courts to recognise and enforce an interim and final award in claimant's favor, relating to alleged breaches of a shareholder agreement concluded with a Czech company for a joint venture project in the aviation manufacturing industry in the Czech Republic.
Capital contributions to finance the purchase of assets of a bankrupt State-owned Czech aircraft manufacturing company under certain unanimous shareholder agreement; claims to money in the form of an arbitral award in Frontier's favor. Decided in favour of State Czech Republic Canada Secondary: C - Manufacturing 30 - Manufacture of other transport equipment Williams, D. A. R. - President

Álvarez, H. C. - Claimant

Schreuer, C. H. - Respondent
20.00 mln USD Data not available Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

Full protection and security, or similar

Other
None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Final Award dated 12 November 2010 None None None None None None
29 2005 Canadian Cattlemen v. USA The Canadian Cattlemen for Fair Trade (formerly Consolidated Canadian Claims) v. United States of America NAFTA UNCITRAL None Investment: Beef and cattle-related operations including cow-calf production, back-grounding, finishing, custom feeding, agency/brokerage as well as secondary transportation and crop production activities.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's ban on Canadian cattle and beef imports after a cow in Alberta, Canada was found to have mad cow disease (bovine spongiform encephalopathy).
Beef and cattle-related operations including cow-calf production, back-grounding, finishing, custom feeding, agency/brokerage as well as secondary transportation and crop production activities. Decided in favour of State United States of America Canada Primary: A - Agriculture, forestry and fishing 1 - Crop and animal production, hunting and related service activities Böckstiegel, K.-H. - President

Low, L. A. - Unknown

Bacchus, J. - Unknown
235.00 mln USD Data not available National treatment None - jurisdiction declined Award on Jurisdiction dated 28 January 2008 None None None None None None
30 2005 Scotiabank v. Argentina Bank of Nova Scotia v. Argentine Republic Argentina - Canada BIT (1991) UNCITRAL None Investment: Ownership of local bank, Scotiabank Quilmes SA.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged negative effects of the forced pesification of the bank's local subsidiary US-dollar assets and liabilities, during the Argentinean economic crisis of 2002.
Ownership of local bank, Scotiabank Quilmes SA. Settled Argentina Canada Tertiary: K - Financial and insurance activities 64 - Financial service activities, except insurance and pension funding Brower, C. N. - Claimant

Pellet, A. - Respondent

Name not available - President
600.00 mln USD Data not available Data not available Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability None None None None None None None
31 2004 Grand River v. USA Grand River Enterprises Six Nations, Ltd., et.al. v. United States of America NAFTA UNCITRAL None Investment: Controlling shareholding and/or ownership of companies engaged in the tobacco manufacturing and distribution business.

Summary: Claims arising out of a 1998 settlement agreement between various state's Attorney General and major tobacco companies (concluded to settle litigation by several U.S. states against certain U.S. cigarette manufacturers), and state legislation that partially implemented the settlement.
Controlling shareholding and/or ownership of companies engaged in the tobacco manufacturing and distribution business. Decided in favour of State United States of America Canada Secondary: C - Manufacturing 12 - Manufacture of tobacco products Nariman, F. S. - President

Anaya, J. - Claimant

Crook, J. R. - Respondent
664.00 mln USD Data not available Indirect expropriation

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

National treatment

Most-favoured nation treatment
None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Decision on Objections to Jurisdiction dated 20 July 2006

Award dated 12 January 2011
None None None None None None
32 2004 Tembec v. USA Tembec Inc. et al. v. United States of America NAFTA UNCITRAL ICSID Investment: Forest products company.

Summary: Claims arising out of a number of countervailing duties and antidumping measures adopted by the United States relating to Canadian softwood lumber products, as a result of which the claimant was required to pay duties on these products imported to the United States.
Forest products company. Settled United States of America Canada Primary: A - Agriculture, forestry and fishing 2 - Forestry and logging van den Berg, A. J. - President

Robinson, D. R. - Unknown

de Mestral, A. - Unknown
200.00 mln USD Data not available Indirect expropriation

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

National treatment

Most-favoured nation treatment
Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability Decision on Preliminary Question dated 6 June 2006

Joint Order on the Costs of Arbitration and for the Termination of Certain Arbitral Proceedings dated 19 July 2007
None Judicial review by national courts Award/decision upheld (Judicial review by national courts) Memorandum Opinion (on Tembec's application to vacate award), U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, dated 14 August 2008 (Judicial review by national courts) None None
33 2004 Terminal Forest v. USA Terminal Forest Products Ltd. v. United States of America NAFTA UNCITRAL ICSID Investment: Forest products company.

Summary: Claims arising out of a number of countervailing duties and antidumping measures adopted by the United States relating to Canadian softwood lumber products, as a result of which the claimant was required to pay duties on these products imported to the United States.
Forest products company. Settled United States of America Canada Primary: A - Agriculture, forestry and fishing 2 - Forestry and logging van den Berg, A. J. - President

Robinson, D. R. - Unknown

de Mestral, A. - Unknown
90.00 mln USD Data not available Indirect expropriation

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

National treatment

Most-favoured nation treatment
Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability Decision on Preliminary Question dated 6 June 2006

Joint Order on the Costs of Arbitration and for the Termination of Certain Arbitral Proceedings dated 19 July 2007
None Judicial review by national courts Award/decision upheld (Judicial review by national courts) Memorandum Opinion (on Tembec's application to vacate award), U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, dated 14 August 2008 (Judicial review by national courts) None None
34 2004 Ulemek v. Croatia Mr. Nedjeljko Ulemek v. Croatia Canada - Croatia BIT (1997) UNCITRAL None Investment: Shareholding in local joint venture engaged in activities concerning office machinery and equipment.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged mistreatment to claimant's investment in the Croatian joint venture Jugoturbina Select; particularly, concerning allegations that as a result of the general state of armed conflict and the claimant's Serbian ancestry, he was allegedly forced to leave Croatia in the spring of 1991, and his investment was confiscated and transferred to other companies.
Shareholding in local joint venture engaged in activities concerning office machinery and equipment. Decided in favour of State Croatia Canada Secondary: C - Manufacturing 28 - Manufacture of machinery and equipment n.e.c. Magnusson, S. - President

Rubins, N. - Claimant

Barbic, J. - Respondent
2.60 mln USD Data not available Direct expropriation

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

Full protection and security, or similar

National treatment

Most-favoured nation treatment

Other
None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Award dated 28 May 2008 None Data not available Data not available Data not available Data not available Data not available
35 2004 Vannessa Ventures v. Venezuela Vannessa Ventures Ltd v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/04/6) Canada - Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of BIT (1996) ICSID AF ICSID Investment: Majority shareholding in a company holding a mining concession for gold and copper.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's retraction of claimant's mining rights in Las Cristinas in the south east of Venezuela, one of the world’s greatest undeveloped sources of gold, under the allegation that claimant's purchase of the shares was illegal.
Majority shareholding in a company holding a mining concession for gold and copper. Decided in favour of State Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Canada Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 7 - Mining of metal ores Lowe, V. - President

Briner, R. - President (replaced)

Veeder, V. V. - President (replaced)

Brower, C. N. - Claimant

Stern, B. - Respondent

Paulsson, J. - Respondent (replaced)
1045.00 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
None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Decision on jurisdiction dated 22 August 2008

Award dated 16 January 2013
None None None None None None
36 2003 Encana v. Ecuador EnCana Corporation v. Republic of Ecuador (LCIA Case No. UN3481) Canada - Ecuador BIT (1996) UNCITRAL LCIA Investment: Ownership of local subsidiaries that had entered into participation contracts for the exploration and exploitation of oil and gas reserves with Petroecuador, a State-owned entity.

Summary: Claims arising out of VAT refunds to which the claimant's subsidiaries were allegedly entitled under Ecuadorian laws and regulations.
Ownership of local subsidiaries that had entered into participation contracts for the exploration and exploitation of oil and gas reserves with Petroecuador, a State-owned entity. Decided in favour of State Ecuador Canada Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 6 - Extraction of crude petroleum and natural gas Crawford, J. R. - President

Grigera Naón, H. A. - Claimant

Barrera Sweeney, P. - Respondent

Barrera Valverde, A. - Respondent (replaced)
80.00 mln USD Data not available Indirect expropriation

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

National treatment

Other
None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Award dated 3 February 2006

Partial Award on Jurisdiction dated 27 February 2004
Partial Dissenting Opinion of Mr. Horacio A. Grigera Naón (Award) None None None None None
37 2003 Glamis Gold v. USA Glamis Gold Ltd. v. United States of America NAFTA UNCITRAL ICSID Investment: Publicly-held corporation engaged in the mining of precious metals.

Summary: Claims arising out of certain federal government actions and California state measures regarding open-pit mining operations, allegedly resulting in injuries to a proposed gold mine in Imperial County, California.
Publicly-held corporation engaged in the mining of precious metals. Decided in favour of State United States of America Canada Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 7 - Mining of metal ores Young, M. K. - President

Hubbard, K. D. - Claimant

Morgan, D. L. - Claimant (replaced)

Caron, D. D. - Respondent
50.00 mln USD Data not available Indirect expropriation

Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims
None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Award dated 8 June 2009 None None None None None None
38 2002 Canfor v. USA Canfor Corporation v. United States of America NAFTA UNCITRAL ICSID Investment: Forest products company.

Summary: Claims arising out of a number of countervailing duties and antidumping measures adopted by the United States relating to Canadian softwood lumber products, as a result of which the claimant was required to pay duties on these products imported to the United States.
Forest products company. Settled United States of America Canada Primary: A - Agriculture, forestry and fishing 2 - Forestry and logging van den Berg, A. J. - President

Robinson, D. R. - Unknown

de Mestral, A. - Unknown
250.00 mln USD Data not available Indirect expropriation

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

National treatment

Most-favoured nation treatment
Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability Decision on Preliminary Question dated 6 June 2006

Joint Order on the Costs of Arbitration and for the Termination of Certain Arbitral Proceedings dated 19 July 2007
None Judicial review by national courts Award/decision upheld (Judicial review by national courts) Memorandum Opinion (on Tembec's application to vacate award), U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, dated 14 August 2008 (Judicial review by national courts) None None
39 2002 Kenex v. USA Kenex Ltd. v. United States of America NAFTA UNCITRAL None Investment: Manufacturing, marketing and distributing company of industrial products made from the cannabis plant.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Drug Enforcement Administration’s interpretation of the Controlled Substances Act as prohibiting the sale of products that cause the controlled substance THC to enter the human body.
Manufacturing, marketing and distributing company of industrial products made from the cannabis plant. Discontinued United States of America Canada Secondary: C - Manufacturing 21 - Manufacture of basic pharmaceutical products and pharmaceutical preparations Tribunal not constituted 20.00 mln USD Data not available Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

National treatment

Most-favoured nation treatment
Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability None None None None None None None
40 2002 Thunderbird v. Mexico International Thunderbird Gaming Corporation v. The United Mexican States NAFTA UNCITRAL ICSID Investment: Ownership of three gaming facilities.

Summary: Claims arising out of the closure of the investor's gaming facilities by the Mexican government agency that had jurisdiction over gaming activity.
Ownership of three gaming facilities. Decided in favour of State Mexico Canada Tertiary: R - Arts, entertainment and recreation 92 - Gambling and betting activities van den Berg, A. J. - President

Wälde, T. W. - Claimant

Portal Ariosa, A. - Respondent
100.00 mln USD Data not available Indirect expropriation

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

National treatment

Most-favoured nation treatment
None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Arbitral Award dated 26 January 2006 Separate Opinion of Mr. Thomas Wälde (Arbitral Award) Judicial review by national courts Award/decision upheld (Judicial review by national courts) Memorandum Opinion (on the petition to set aside the award), U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, dated 14 February 2007 (Judicial review by national courts) None None
41 2000 ADF v. USA ADF Group Inc. v. United States of America (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/00/1) NAFTA ICSID AF ICSID Investment: Subcontractor to a U.S. company which had entered into a contract with local authorities for a highway construction project.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Springfield Interchange Highway construction project in Virginia; particularly, alleged injuries resulting from the federal Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 and implementing regulations requiring that federally-funded state highway projects used only domestically produced steel.
Subcontractor to a U.S. company which had entered into a contract with local authorities for a highway construction project. Decided in favour of State United States of America Canada Tertiary: F - Construction 42 - Civil engineering Feliciano, F. P. - President

de Mestral, A. - Claimant

Lamm, C. B. - Respondent
90.00 mln USD Data not available Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

National treatment

Performance requirements
None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Award dated 9 January 2003 None None None None None None
42 1999 Methanex v. USA Methanex Corporation v. United States of America NAFTA UNCITRAL ICSID Investment: Ownership of marketing and distributing company of methanol.

Summary: Claims arising out of alleged injuries resulting from a California ban on the use or sale in California of the gasoline additive MTBE. Methanol, central to the investor's activities, is an ingredient used to manufacture MTBE.
Ownership of marketing and distributing company of methanol. Decided in favour of State United States of America Canada Secondary: C - Manufacturing 20 - Manufacture of chemicals and chemical products Veeder, V. V. - President

Rowley, J. W. - Claimant

Reisman, W. M. - Respondent
970.00 mln USD Data not available Indirect expropriation

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

National treatment
None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Partial Award dated 7 August 2002

Final Award of the Tribunal on Jurisdiction and Merits dated 3 August 2005
None None None None None None
43 1999 Mondev v. USA Mondev International Ltd. v. United States of America (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/99/2) NAFTA ICSID AF ICSID Investment: Commercial real estate development contract concluded between the city of Boston and a company owned by the claimant.

Summary: Claims arising out of alleged losses suffered by an enterprise owned and controlled by the claimant resulting from a decision by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts and from Massachusetts state law.
Commercial real estate development contract concluded between the city of Boston and a company owned by the claimant. Decided in favour of State United States of America Canada Tertiary: L - Real estate activities 68 - Real estate activities Stephen, N. - President

Crawford, J. R. - Claimant

Schwebel, S. M. - Respondent
50.00 mln USD Data not available Indirect expropriation

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

National treatment
None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Award dated 11 October 2002 None None None None None None
44 1998 Loewen v. USA Loewen Group, Inc. and Raymond L. Loewen v. United States of America (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/98/3) NAFTA ICSID AF ICSID Investment: Stock holding in corporation dedicated to funeral home operations.

Summary: Claims arising out of alleged mistreatment caused to the investor by the state of Mississippi in the course of commercial litigation between the claimant and one of its competitors in the funeral home and funeral insurance business.
Stock holding in corporation dedicated to funeral home operations. Decided in favour of State United States of America Canada Tertiary: S - Other service activities 96 - Other personal service activities Mason, A. - President

Mustill, M. - Claimant

Fortier, L. Y. - Claimant (replaced)

Mikva, A. - Respondent
725.00 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

National treatment
None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Decision on Hearing of Respondent's Objection to Competence and Jurisdiction dated 5 January 2001

Award dated 26 June 2003
None Judicial review by national courts Award/decision upheld (Judicial review by national courts) Raymond L. Loewen v. United States of America, United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Civil Action No. 04-2151, Memorandum Opinion dated 31 October 2005 (Judicial review by national courts) None None