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

Greece - as home State

Clear selection
Loaded 14 out of 14 Show all
No. Year of
initiation
Short case
name
Summary Outcome of
original proceedings
Respondent
State
Home State
of investor
1 2016 J&P-AVAX v. Lebanon J&P-AVAX S.A. v. Lebanese Republic (ICSID Case No. ARB/16/29) Greece - Lebanon BIT (1997) ICSID ICSID Investment: Investments in an electric power generation project.

Summary:
Investments in an electric power generation project. Pending Lebanon Greece Tertiary: F - Construction 42 - Civil engineering Alexandrov, S. A. - Claimant

Caron, D. D. - President

Douglas, Z. - Respondent
Data not available Data not available Data not available Pending None None None None None None None
2 2016 Rafikovich Amalyan v. Russia Artashes Rafikovich Amalyan v. Russian Federation Greece - Russian Federation BIT (1993) UNCITRAL Data not available Investment: Capital loans to the Agency of Reconstruction and Development LLC (ARR) made through Financial and Industrial Corporation SAN LLC in which the claimant acquired a 50% stake.

Summary: Claims arising out of several State organs’ alleged acts relating to a shorefront development project in which the claimant had invested, including refused registration of property rights on ARR for a 29-hectare land plot it had developed at the Voronezh river reservoir, allegedly resulting in ARR’s bankruptcy, and registration of the land in the City Administration’s favour. Based on an agreement with the City Administration, ARR had undertaken hydraulic filling works on the reservoir to create the land plot, and it had been allegedly promised ownership of the land for its ultimate development into a commercial and residential district.
Capital loans to the Agency of Reconstruction and Development LLC (ARR) made through Financial and Industrial Corporation SAN LLC in which the claimant acquired a 50% stake. Pending Russian Federation Greece Tertiary: F - Construction 42 - Civil engineering Data not available 3500.00 mln RUB (45.00 mln USD) Data not available Data not available Pending None None None None None None None
3 2015 Adamakopoulos and others v. Cyprus Theodoros Adamakopoulos, Ilektra Adamantidou, Vasileios Adamopoulos and others v. Republic of Cyprus (ICSID Case No. ARB/15/49) Cyprus - Greece BIT (1992)

BLEU (Belgium-Luxembourg Economic Union) - Cyprus BIT (1991)
ICSID ICSID Investment: Deposits and bonds in two Cypriot banks, Laiki Bank (also known as Cyprus Popular Bank) and the Bank of Cyprus.

Summary: Claims arising out of alleged discriminatory treatment as a result of the € 10 billion bailout package for Cyprus by the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
Deposits and bonds in two Cypriot banks, Laiki Bank (also known as Cyprus Popular Bank) and the Bank of Cyprus. Pending Cyprus Greece

Luxembourg
Tertiary: K - Financial and insurance activities 64 - Financial service activities, except insurance and pension funding Orrego Vicuña, F. - Claimant

Kohen, M. G. - Respondent

McRae, D. M. - President
Data not available Data not available Data not available Pending None None None None None None None
4 2013 Marfin v. Cyprus Marfin Investment Group Holdings S.A., Alexandros Bakatselos and others v. Republic of Cyprus (ICSID Case No. ARB/13/27) Cyprus - Greece BIT (1992) ICSID ICSID Investment: Shareholding in Cyprus Popular Bank (also known as the Laiki bank).

Summary: Claims arising out of the issuance of a decree that increased the Government's participation in a Cypriot bank in which the claimants had invested, allegedly resulting in the take-over of the institution's management control and the bank's subsequent insolvency.
Shareholding in Cyprus Popular Bank (also known as the Laiki bank). Pending Cyprus Greece Tertiary: K - Financial and insurance activities 64 - Financial service activities, except insurance and pension funding Hanotiau, B. - President

Price, D. M. - Claimant

Edward, D. A. O. - Respondent
823.00 mln EUR (1083.00 mln USD) Data not available Indirect expropriation

Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures
Pending None None None None None None None
5 2013 Mytilineos v. Serbia (II) Mytilineos Holdings v. Serbia (II) (PCA Case No. 2014-30) Greece - Serbia BIT (1997) UNCITRAL PCA Investment: Claims to money under several agreements concluded between the claimant and RTB-BOR, a socially-owned Yugoslavian company, for cooperation in the mineral extraction and metallurgy business operated by RTB-BOR.

Summary: Claims arising out of Serbia's alleged failure to honour a commitment regarding the deadline to privatize the mining company RTB-Bor, which prevented the claimant to recover outstanding payments from the Government.
Claims to money under several agreements concluded between the claimant and RTB-BOR, a socially-owned Yugoslavian company, for cooperation in the mineral extraction and metallurgy business operated by RTB-BOR. Decided in favour of investor Serbia Greece Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 7 - Mining of metal ores Sachs, K. - President

Bishop, D. - Claimant

Vasiljević, M. - Respondent

Varady, T. - Respondent (replaced)
100.00 mln USD 40.00 mln USD Indirect expropriation

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

Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims
Award dated August 2017 None None None None None None
6 2011 Loutraki v. Serbia Club Hotel Loutraki S.A. and Casinos Austria International Holding GMBH v. Republic of Serbia (ICSID Case No. ARB/11/4) Austria - Serbia BIT (2001)

Greece - Serbia BIT (1997)
ICSID ICSID Investment: Rights under a licensing agreement regarding the operation of casinos in and around Belgrade.

Summary: Claims arising out of a partnership between the claimants and the Serbian national lottery in the development of a casino in Belgrade.
Rights under a licensing agreement regarding the operation of casinos in and around Belgrade. Settled Serbia Greece

Austria
Tertiary: R - Arts, entertainment and recreation 92 - Gambling and betting activities Orrego Vicuña, F. - President

Grigera Naón, H. A. - Claimant

Sekolec, J. - Respondent
Data not available Data not available Data not available Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability Order taking note of the discontinuance of the proceeding issued by the Tribunal dated 18 January 2012, pursuant to ICSID Arbitration Rule 44 None None None None None None
7 2011 Mamidoil v. Albania Mamidoil Jetoil Greek Petroleum Products Societe Anonyme S.A. v. Republic of Albania (ICSID Case No. ARB/11/24) Albania - Greece BIT (1991)

The Energy Charter Treaty (1994)
ICSID ICSID Investment: Rights under a 20 year lease contract concluded between claimant and Albania's Ministry of Public Finance and Privatization to build an oil container terminal in the Durres Port.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's decision to relocate claimant's operations after designating the port area in which it had planned to establish a tank farm as a non-industrial zone, and other State's actions allegedly aimed at banning the use of the claimant's fuel deposits, disrupting the investments' exploitation, banning the supply of the fuel tank farm from the sea, and amounting to create a monopole and irregular market.
Rights under a 20 year lease contract concluded between claimant and Albania's Ministry of Public Finance and Privatization to build an oil container terminal in the Durres Port. Decided in favour of State Albania Greece Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 6 - Extraction of crude petroleum and natural gas Knieper, R. - President

Hammond, S. A. - Claimant

Banifatemi, Y. - Respondent
23.00 mln USD Data not available Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

Full protection and security, or similar

Indirect expropriation

Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures
None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Award dated 30 March 2015 Dissenting Opinion of Steven A. Hammond ICSID annulment proceedings Discontinued (ICSID annulment proceedings) None None McRae, D. M. - President

Jones, D. - Member

Reinisch, A. - Member
8 2007 Laskaridis Shipping v. Ukraine Laskaridis Shipping Co LTD, Lavinia Corporation, A K Laskaridis and P K Laskaridis v. Ukraine Greece - Ukraine BIT (1994) UNCITRAL PCA Investment: Rights under a shipyard and boatbuilding contract.

Summary: Claims arising out of the investors' purchase of a series of vessels from a now-insolvent Ukrainian shipyard and alleged expropriatory acts by the Government in relation to such purchases.
Rights under a shipyard and boatbuilding contract. Settled Ukraine Greece Secondary: C - Manufacturing 30 - Manufacture of other transport equipment Fortier, L. Y. - President

Williams, D. A. R. - Claimant

Dossou, R. - Respondent
9.00 mln USD Data not available Indirect expropriation

Unclear
Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability Data not available Data not available None None None None None
9 2007 Pantechniki v. Albania Pantechniki S.A. Contractors & Engineers v. Republic of Albania (ICSID Case No. ARB/07/21) Albania - Greece BIT (1991) ICSID ICSID Investment: Rights under two construction contracts concluded between the claimant and the Albanian General Road Directorate for works on bridges and roads in Albania.

Summary: Claims arising out of the overrun and ransack of the investor's road work site in Albania during severe civil disturbances in 1997, and the alleged Government's refusal to grant him compensation despite the existence of contractual clauses under which the Albanian General Road Directorate accepted the risk of losses due to civil disturbance.
Rights under two construction contracts concluded between the claimant and the Albanian General Road Directorate for works on bridges and roads in Albania. Decided in favour of State Albania Greece Tertiary: F - Construction 42 - Civil engineering Paulsson, J. - Sole arbitrator 2.00 mln USD Data not available Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

Full protection and security, or similar
None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Award dated 30 July 2009 None None None None None None
10 2006 Roussalis v. Romania Spyridon Roussalis v. Romania (ICSID Case No. ARB/06/1) Greece - Romania BIT (1997) ICSID ICSID Investment: Share purchase agreement concluded between the claimant and Romania's Authority for State Assets Recovery to acquire a controlling interest in a formerly State-owned enterprise engaged in the frozen-food warehousing business.

Summary: Claims arising out of disagreements over compliance with a post-investment obligation related to claimant's purchase of shares in a large frozen food warehousing facility from the Romanian government's privatization authority; also, other measures such as tax liabilities and penalties allegedly imposed on the investor's company by the Romanian authorities and the enforced closure of his operation because of an alleged failure to comply with EU-mandated food safety regulations.
Share purchase agreement concluded between the claimant and Romania's Authority for State Assets Recovery to acquire a controlling interest in a formerly State-owned enterprise engaged in the frozen-food warehousing business. Decided in favour of State Romania Greece Tertiary: H - Transportation and storage 52 - Warehousing and support activities for transportation Hanotiau, B. - President

Giardina, A. - Claimant

Reisman, W. M. - Respondent
110.00 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

Other
None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Award dated 7 December 2011 Declaration of W. Michael Reisman (Award) None None None None None
11 2005 Kardassopoulos v. Georgia Ioannis Kardassopoulos v. Georgia (ICSID Case No. ARB/05/18) Georgia - Greece BIT (1994)

The Energy Charter Treaty (1994)
ICSID ICSID Investment: Co-ownership of a Panamanian company that had executed a joint venture agreement with a State-owned company and created a joint venture vehicle that held a Deed of Concession over certain oil and gas pipelines in Georgia.

Summary: Claims arising out of a Government's decree cancelling the concession rights of an investment vehicle, in which Mr. Ioannis Kardassopoulos and Mr. Ron Fuchs held interests, devoted to the development of an oil pipeline to transport oil and gas from Azerbaijan to the Black Sea.
Co-ownership of a Panamanian company that had executed a joint venture agreement with a State-owned company and created a joint venture vehicle that held a Deed of Concession over certain oil and gas pipelines in Georgia. Decided in favour of investor Georgia Greece Tertiary: H - Transportation and storage 49 - Land transport and transport via pipelines Fortier, L. Y. - President

Orrego Vicuña, F. - Claimant

Lowe, V. - Respondent

Watts, A. - Respondent (replaced)
30.20 mln USD 15.10 mln USD Direct expropriation

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

Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims
Decision on Jurisdiction dated 6 July 2007

Award dated 3 March 2010
None ICSID annulment proceedings Discontinued (ICSID annulment proceedings) Decision of the ad hoc Committee on the Stay of Enforcement of the Award dated 12 November 2010 (ICSID annulment proceedings)

Decision of the ad hoc Committee to Terminate the Stay of Enforcement of the Award dated 19 January 2011 (ICSID annulment proceedings)

Decision of the ad hoc Committee to Suspend the Annulment Proceeding dated 21 March 2011 (ICSID annulment proceedings)

Order taking note of the discontinuance of the proceeding dated 12 December 2011, pursuant to ICSID Arbitration Rules 53 and 43(1) (ICSID annulment proceedings)
None Hascher, D. - President

Abraham, C. W. M. - Member

Böckstiegel, K.-H. - Member
12 2005 Mytilineos v. Serbia (I) Mytilineos Holdings SA v. The State Union of Serbia & Montenegro and Republic of Serbia (I) Greece - Serbia BIT (1997) UNCITRAL PCA Investment: Rights under seven agreements concluded between the claimant and RTB-BOR, a socially-owned Yugoslavian company, for cooperation in the mineral extraction and metallurgy business operated by RTB-BOR.

Summary: Claims arising out of laws and administrative measures enacted by the Government that allegedly destroyed claimant's investment in a mineral extraction and metallurgy business in the Serbian city of Bor, including the allegedly forced bankruptcy by the respondent of a State-owned bank that had guaranteed the claimant's investment.
Rights under seven agreements concluded between the claimant and RTB-BOR, a socially-owned Yugoslavian company, for cooperation in the mineral extraction and metallurgy business operated by RTB-BOR. Decided in favour of State Serbia Greece Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 7 - Mining of metal ores Reinisch, A. - President

Mankatou, A. - Claimant

Koussoulis, S. - Claimant (replaced)

Knesevic, G. - Respondent

Mitrović, D. - Respondent (replaced)
31.30 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
None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Partial Award on Jurisdiction dated 8 September 2006

Award dated 23 September 2009
Dissenting Opinion by Dobrosav Mitrović (Partial Award on Jurisdiction) None None None None None
13 1999 Middle East Cement v. Egypt Middle East Cement Shipping and Handling Co. v. Arab Republic of Egypt (ICSID Case No. ARB/99/6) Egypt - Greece BIT (1993) ICSID ICSID Investment: Ownership of branch enterprise licensed to import and store bulk cement in depot ship.

Summary: Claims arising out of Egypt's alleged expropriation of Middle East Cement's interests in a business concession located in Egypt and Egypt's alleged failure to ensure the re-exportation of Middle East Cement's assets.
Ownership of branch enterprise licensed to import and store bulk cement in depot ship. Decided in favour of investor Egypt Greece Tertiary: H - Transportation and storage 52 - Warehousing and support activities for transportation Böckstiegel, K.-H. - President

Bernardini, P. - Claimant

Wallace, D. Jr. - Respondent
42.20 mln USD 2.20 mln USD Indirect expropriation Indirect expropriation Award dated 12 April 2002 None None None None None None
14 1995 Leaf Tobacco v. Albania Leaf Tobacco A. Michaelides S.A. and Greek-Albanian Leaf Tobacco & Co. S.A. v. Republic of Albania (ICSID Case No. ARB/95/1) Albania - Greece BIT (1991) ICSID ICSID Investment: Data not available

Summary: Data not available
Data not available Settled Albania Greece Secondary: C - Manufacturing 12 - Manufacture of tobacco products Tribunal not constituted Data not available Data not available Data not available Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability Order of the Secretary-General taking note of the discontinuance dated 30 January 1997, pursuant to Arbitration Rule 44 None None None None None None