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

Hungary - as respondent State

Clear selection
Loaded 16 out of 16 Show all
No. Year of
initiation
Short case
name
Summary Outcome of
original proceedings
Respondent
State
Home State
of investor
1 2017 Al Ramahi v. Hungary Mazen Al Ramahi v. Hungary (ICSID Case No. ARB/17/45) Hungary - Jordan BIT (2007) ICSID ICSID Investment: Investments in a hotel chain in Budapest.

Summary:
Investments in a hotel chain in Budapest. Pending Hungary Jordan Tertiary: I - Accommodation and food service activities 55 - Accommodation Data not available Data not available Data not available Data not available Pending None None None None None None None
2 2017 Inicia and others v. Hungary Inicia Zrt, Kintyre Kft and Magyar Farming Company Ltd v. Hungary (ICSID Case No. ARB/17/27) Hungary - United Kingdom BIT (1987) ICSID ICSID Investment: Lease contract with the Government for 500 hectares of agricultural land.

Summary: Claims arising out of the termination by the Government of the claimants’ land lease contract, following the passage of new legislation in 2013 that mandated ending of long-term land lease contracts between foreign investors and the State, with no compensation to affected farmers.
Lease contract with the Government for 500 hectares of agricultural land. Pending Hungary United Kingdom Primary: A - Agriculture, forestry and fishing 1 - Crop and animal production, hunting and related service activities Name not available - President

Alexandrov, S. A. - Claimant

Hanefeld, I. - Respondent
Data not available Data not available Data not available Pending None None None None None None None
3 2016 ENGIE and others v. Hungary ENGIE International Holdings BV, ENGIE SA and GDF International SAS v. Hungary (ICSID Case No. ARB/16/14) The Energy Charter Treaty (1994) ICSID ICSID Investment: Shareholding in gas companies.

Summary:
Shareholding in gas companies. Pending Hungary France

Netherlands
Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply Williams, D. A. R. - Claimant

Bernardini, P. - Respondent

Sachs, K. - President
642.00 mln EUR (725.60 mln USD) Data not available Data not available Pending None None None None None None None
4 2014 Sodexo Pass v. Hungary Sodexo Pass International SAS v. Hungary (ICSID Case No. ARB/14/20) France - Hungary BIT (1986) ICSID ICSID Investment: Company engaged in the sale of social vouchers in Hungary.

Summary: Claims arising out of the enactment of legislation granting the Government a monopoly over the prepaid corporate vouchers industry, allegedly introducing a State-run voucher system with conditions more favourable than those granted to private operators.
Company engaged in the sale of social vouchers in Hungary. Pending Hungary France Tertiary: N - Administrative and support service activities 82 - Office administrative, office support and other business support activities Park, W. W. - President

Carlevaris, A. - Claimant

Thomas, J. C. - Respondent
Data not available Data not available Data not available Pending None None None None None None None
5 2013 Edenred v. Hungary Edenred S.A. v. Hungary (ICSID Case No. ARB/13/21) France - Hungary BIT (1986) ICSID ICSID Investment: Company engaged in the sale of social vouchers in Hungary.

Summary: Claims arising out of the enactment of legislation granting the Government a monopoly over the prepaid corporate vouchers industry, allegedly introducing a State-run voucher system with conditions more favourable than those granted to private operators.
Company engaged in the sale of social vouchers in Hungary. Decided in favour of investor Hungary France Tertiary: N - Administrative and support service activities 82 - Office administrative, office support and other business support activities Fernández-Armesto, J. - President

Orrego Vicuña, F. - Claimant

von Wobeser, C. - Respondent
Data not available 23.00 mln EUR (24.30 mln USD) Indirect expropriation Indirect expropriation Decision on the Respondent’s preliminary objections pursuant to ICSID Arbitration Rule 41(5) dated 6 June 2014

Decision concerning the Respondent’s request to address the objections to jurisdiction as a preliminary question dated 16 October 2014

Award dated 13 December 2016
None ICSID annulment proceedings Pending (ICSID annulment proceedings) None None Tercier, P. - President

Verhoosel, G. - Member

Ufot, D. U. - Member
6 2013 Le Chèque Déjeuner v. Hungary Le Chèque Déjeuner and C.D Holding Internationale v. Hungary (ICSID Case No. ARB/13/35) France - Hungary BIT (1986) ICSID ICSID Investment: Company engaged in the sale of social vouchers in Hungary.

Summary: Claims arising out of the enactment of legislation granting the Government a monopoly over the prepaid corporate vouchers industry, allegedly introducing a State-run voucher system with conditions more favorable than those granted to private operators.
Company engaged in the sale of social vouchers in Hungary. Pending Hungary France Tertiary: N - Administrative and support service activities 82 - Office administrative, office support and other business support activities Böckstiegel, K.-H. - President

Fortier, L. Y. - Claimant

Bethlehem, D. - Respondent
Data not available Data not available Data not available Pending Decision on Jurisdiction dated 3 March 2016 None None None None None None
7 2012 Accession Mezzanine v. Hungary Accession Mezzanine Capital L.P. and Danubius Kereskedöház Vagyonkezelö Zrt. v. Hungary (ICSID Case No. ARB/12/3) Hungary - United Kingdom BIT (1987) ICSID ICSID Investment: Shareholding in two Hungarian companies (Sláger Rádió Műsorszolgáltató Zrt. and Danubius Rádió Műsorszolgáltató Zrt.) that won a competitive tender for licenses for FM national radio-broadcasting frequencies in Hungary.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation of claimants' investments in nationwide FM-frequency radio-broadcasting licenses in Hungary, through the Government's decision to award the radio-broadcasting frequencies formerly held by claimants to a third party.
Shareholding in two Hungarian companies (Sláger Rádió Műsorszolgáltató Zrt. and Danubius Rádió Műsorszolgáltató Zrt.) that won a competitive tender for licenses for FM national radio-broadcasting frequencies in Hungary. Decided in favour of State Hungary United Kingdom Tertiary: J - Information and communication 60 - Programming and broadcasting activities Rovine, A. W. - President

Lalonde, M. - Claimant

Douglas, Z. - Respondent

McRae, D. M. - Respondent (replaced)
Data not available Data not available Indirect expropriation

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

Umbrella clause

National treatment

Customary rules of international law

Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures
None - jurisdiction declined Decision on Respondent’s Objection under Arbitration Rule 41(5) dated 16 January 2013

Decision on Respondent's Notice of Jurisdictional Objections and Request for Bifurcation dated 8 August 2013

Award dated 17 April 2015
None None None None None None
8 2012 Dan Cake v. Hungary Dan Cake (Portugal) S.A. v. Hungary (ICSID Case No. ARB/12/9) Hungary - Portugal BIT (1992) ICSID ICSID Investment: Interests in a local bakery company.

Summary: Claims arising out of the bankruptcy of a Hungarian baking company in which the claimant had invested and the alleged mishandling by Hungary's authorities of an insolvency process.
Interests in a local bakery company. Decided in favour of investor Hungary Portugal Secondary: C - Manufacturing 10 - Manufacture of food products Mayer, P. - President

Paulsson, J. - Claimant

Landau, T. - Respondent
47.90 mln EUR (54.50 mln USD) Data not available 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

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

Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures
Decision on Jurisdiction and Liability dated 24 August 2015 None None None None None None
9 2012 Emmis v. Hungary Emmis International Holding, B.V., Emmis Radio Operating, B.V., MEM Magyar Electronic Media Kereskedelmi és Szolgáltató Kft. v. Hungary (ICSID Case No. ARB/12/2) Hungary - Netherlands BIT (1987)

Hungary - Switzerland BIT (1988)
ICSID ICSID Investment: Shareholding in a Hungarian company that won a competitive tender for one of the two licenses for FM national radio-broadcasting frequencies in Hungary.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation of claimants' investments in nationwide FM-frequency radio-broadcasting licenses in Hungary, through the Government's decision to award the radio-broadcasting frequencies formerly held by claimants to a third party.
Shareholding in a Hungarian company that won a competitive tender for one of the two licenses for FM national radio-broadcasting frequencies in Hungary. Decided in favour of State Hungary Netherlands

Switzerland
Tertiary: J - Information and communication 60 - Programming and broadcasting activities McLachlan, C. A. - President

Lalonde, M. - Claimant

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

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

Umbrella clause

National treatment

Customary rules of international law

Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures
None - jurisdiction declined Decision on Respondent’s Objection Under ICSID Arbitration Rule 41(5) dated 11 March 2013

Decision on Respondent's Application for Bifurcation dated 13 June 2013

Award dated 16 April 2014
None None None None None None
10 2011 Vigotop v. Hungary Vigotop Limited v. Republic of Hungary (ICSID Case No. ARB/11/22) Cyprus - Hungary BIT (1989) ICSID ICSID Investment: Shareholding in two Hungarian subsidiaries; indirect rights under a concession contract for a resort development project to which claimant's local subsidiary was a party.

Summary: Claims arising out of a series of alleged unlawful measures by the Government which culminated in the termination of certain concession contract for a resort development project that would include a casino, three luxury hotels and various attractions, known as the King's City Project.
Shareholding in two Hungarian subsidiaries; indirect rights under a concession contract for a resort development project to which claimant's local subsidiary was a party. Decided in favour of State Hungary Cyprus Tertiary: L - Real estate activities 68 - Real estate activities Sachs, K. - President

Bishop, D. - Claimant

Heiskanen, V. - Respondent
312.60 mln EUR (425.60 mln USD) Data not available Indirect expropriation None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Award dated 1 October 2014 None None None None None None
11 2009 EDF v. Hungary Electricite de France (EDF) International S.A. v. Republic of Hungary The Energy Charter Treaty (1994) UNCITRAL PCA Investment: Majority shareholding in Budapesti Eromu ZRt, an electricity company that operated several plants under long-term power purchase agreements with Hungary’s state electricity company.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's termination of certain long-term power purchase agreements concluded between EDF’s local subsidiary and the State-owned energy company MVM, following a ruling by the European Commission declaring that the agreements were illegal under EU State aid rules and should be terminated.
Majority shareholding in Budapesti Eromu ZRt, an electricity company that operated several plants under long-term power purchase agreements with Hungary’s state electricity company. Decided in favour of investor Hungary France Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply Böckstiegel, K.-H. - President

Dupuy, P.-M. - Claimant

van den Berg, A. J. - Respondent
100.00 mln USD 107.00 mln EUR (132.60 mln USD) Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

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

Other
Award dated 3 December 2014 None Judicial review by national courts Award/decision upheld (Judicial review by national courts) Swiss Federal Supreme Court Decision on Set-Aside of Award dated 6 October 2015 (Judicial review by national courts) None None
12 2007 AES v. Hungary (II) AES Summit Generation Limited and AES-Tisza Erömü Kft. v. Republic of Hungary (II) (ICSID Case No. ARB/07/22) The Energy Charter Treaty (1994) ICSID ICSID Investment: Majority shareholding in a Hungarian electricity generation company that held a power purchase agreement with Hungary; contributions of over EUR 98 million to retrofit certain power station.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's reintroduction in 2006 and 2007 of administrative pricing pursuant to two Price Decrees (after administrative prices had been abolished as of 1 January 2004), and the alleged resulting loss of revenue to the investor.
Majority shareholding in a Hungarian electricity generation company that held a power purchase agreement with Hungary; contributions of over EUR 98 million to retrofit certain power station. Decided in favour of State Hungary United Kingdom Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply von Wobeser, C. - President

Rowley, J. W. - Claimant

Stern, B. - Respondent
230.00 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

Most-favoured nation treatment

Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures
None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Award dated 23 September 2010 None ICSID annulment proceedings Award/decision upheld (ICSID annulment proceedings) Decision of the ad hoc Committee on the Application for Annulment dated 29 June 2012 (ICSID annulment proceedings) None Hanotiau, B. - President

Knieper, R. - Member

Yusuf, A. A. - Member
13 2007 Electrabel v. Hungary Electrabel S.A. v. The Republic of Hungary (ICSID Case No. ARB/07/19) The Energy Charter Treaty (1994) ICSID ICSID Investment: Rights under a power purchase agreement concluded between Electrabel’s subsidiary Dunamenti Eromu (the owner-operator of a power plant near Budapest) and the State-owned electricity wholesaler MVM.

Summary: Claims arising out of Hungary's termination of a power purchase agreement concluded with the investor, allegedly as part of the State's program for liberalizing its electricity market to comply with EU laws on State aid.
Rights under a power purchase agreement concluded between Electrabel’s subsidiary Dunamenti Eromu (the owner-operator of a power plant near Budapest) and the State-owned electricity wholesaler MVM. Decided in favour of State Hungary Belgium Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply Veeder, V. V. - President

Kaufmann-Kohler, G. - Claimant

Stern, B. - Respondent
147000.00 mln HUF (679.70 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

Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures
None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Decision on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law and Liability dated 30 November 2012

Award dated 25 November 2015
None None None None None None
14 2004 Telenor v. Hungary Telenor Mobile Communications AS v. Republic of Hungary (ICSID Case No. ARB/04/15) Hungary - Norway BIT (1991) ICSID ICSID Investment: Direct and indirect holdings in local company (wholly- owned subsidiary) that had a concession agreement for telecommunications services.

Summary: Claims arising out of a series of measures adopted by the respondent with respect to telecommunications service providers that allegedly affected the operation of a concession agreement for the provision of public mobile radiotelephone services concluded between claimant's wholly owned subsidiary and the Hungarian Minister of Transport, Communications and Water Management.
Direct and indirect holdings in local company (wholly- owned subsidiary) that had a concession agreement for telecommunications services. Decided in favour of State Hungary Norway Tertiary: J - Information and communication 61 - Telecommunications Goode, R. - President

Allard, N. W. - Claimant

Marriott, A. L. - Respondent
152.00 mln USD Data not available Indirect expropriation

Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims
None - jurisdiction declined Award dated 13 September 2006 None None None None None None
15 2003 ADC v. Hungary ADC Affiliate Limited and ADC & ADMC Management Limited v. Republic of Hungary (ICSID Case No. ARB/03/16) Cyprus - Hungary BIT (1989) ICSID ICSID Investment: Rights under a contract entered into with a Hungarian State agency, ATAA, to renovate, construct and operate two terminals of Budapest-Ferihegy International Airport in Hungary.

Summary: Claims arising out of the issuance of a decree by the Minister of Transport of Hungary resulting in the takeover of all the activities related to the operation of claimants' investment, following the completion of the construction and renovation of the airport terminals at issue.
Rights under a contract entered into with a Hungarian State agency, ATAA, to renovate, construct and operate two terminals of Budapest-Ferihegy International Airport in Hungary. Decided in favour of investor Hungary Cyprus Tertiary: F - Construction

Tertiary: H - Transportation and storage

Tertiary: H - Transportation and storage
41 - Construction of buildings

51 - Air transport

52 - Warehousing and support activities for transportation
Kaplan, N. - President

Philip, A. - President (replaced)

Brower, C. N. - Claimant

van den Berg, A. J. - Respondent
99.70 mln USD 76.00 mln USD Direct 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
Direct expropriation Award dated 2 October 2006 None None None None None None
16 2001 AES v. Hungary (I) AES Summit Generation Limited v. Republic of Hungary (I) (ICSID Case No. ARB/01/4) The Energy Charter Treaty (1994)

Hungary - United Kingdom BIT (1987)
ICSID ICSID Investment: Power purchase and sale agreement.

Summary: Claims arising out of Hungary's alleged failure to comply with a sale agreement of certain State-owned power facilities.
Power purchase and sale agreement. Settled Hungary United Kingdom Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply Philip, A. - President

Weil, P. - Claimant

Orrego Vicuña, F. - 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 3 January 2002, pursuant to Arbitration Rule 43(1) None None None None None None