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 July 2018

Latest Publications

Publication article
Jun 30, 2015

Treaty-based ISDS Cases Brought Under Dutch IIAs: an Overview

This study, undertaken at the request of the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs, gives an overview of investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) cases initiated by Dutch claimants under international investment agreements (IIAs) to which the Netherlands is a party (“Dutch cases”).

Read more...
Clear selection
Loaded 25 out of 133 Show all
No. Year of
initiation
Short case
name
Summary Outcome of
original proceedings
Arbitrators Decisions
1 2017 APCL v. Gambia APCL Gambia B.V. v. Republic of The Gambia (ICSID Case No. ARB/17/40) Gambia - Netherlands BIT (2002) ICSID ICSID Investment: Investment of the alleged USD 64 million in the exploration of oil in the licensed areas.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged wrongful termination by the Government of licences for exploration of two off-shore oil blocks.
Investment of the alleged USD 64 million in the exploration of oil in the licensed areas. Settled Gambia Netherlands Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 9 - Mining support service activities Name not available - President

Poncet, C. - Claimant

Banifatemi, Y. - 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 pursuant to ICSID Arbitration Rule 43(1) dated 7 June 2018 None None None None None None
2 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. Settled 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 Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability Order taking note of the discontinuance of the proceeding pursuant to ICSID Arbitration Rule 43(1) dated 23 February 2018 None None None None None None
3 2016 Fund III and others v. Egypt Fund III Egypt, LLC, LP Egypt Holdings I, LLC and OMLP Egypt Holdings I, LLC v. Arab Republic of Egypt (ICSID Case No. ARB/16/37) Egypt - United States of America BIT (1986) ICSID ICSID Investment:

Summary:
Settled Egypt United States of America Tertiary: F - Construction 41 - Construction of buildings van Houtte, H. - President

Alexandrov, S. A. - Claimant

Sands, P. - 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 pursuant to ICSID Arbitration Rule 44 dated 11 July 2018 None None None None None None
4 2016 Görkem Inşaat v. Turkmenistan Görkem Inşaat Sanayi ve Ticaret Limited Şirketi v. Turkmenistan (ICSID Case No. ARB/16/30) Turkey - Turkmenistan BIT (1992) ICSID ICSID Investment: Investments in the construction of a shopping and trade center.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged non-payment under a contract for the construction of a shopping mall.
Investments in the construction of a shopping and trade center. Settled Turkmenistan Turkey Tertiary: F - Construction 41 - Construction of buildings Boykin, J. H. - Claimant

Douglas, Z. - Respondent

Annacker, C. - President
10.00 mln USD Data not available Data not available Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability Order Taking Note of the Discontinuance of the Proceeding dated 12 December 2017 None None None None None None
5 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. Settled 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) Non-pecuniary relief National treatment

Most-favoured nation treatment

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

Indirect expropriation
Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability Order of the Secretary-General Taking Note of the Discontinuance of the Proceeding dated 24 March 2017 None None None None None None
6 2015 ArcelorMittal v. Egypt ArcelorMittal S.A. v. Arab Republic of Egypt (ICSID Case No. ARB/15/47) BLEU (Belgium-Luxembourg Economic Union) - Egypt BIT (1999) ICSID ICSID Investment: Investments in the construction of a steel plant.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged refusal to extend the development period for the claimant’s steel plant construction project, followed by a process to revoke the claimant’s licenses. According to the claimant, the construction was delayed due to the occupation of the property and problems with gas and electricity supply.
Investments in the construction of a steel plant. Settled Egypt Luxembourg Secondary: C - Manufacturing 24 - Manufacture of basic metals Price, D. M. - Claimant

Stern, B. - Respondent
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
7 2015 Nabucco v. Turkey Nabucco Gas Pipeline International GmbH in Liqu. v. Republic of Turkey (ICSID Case No. ARB/15/26) Austria - Turkey BIT (1988)

The Energy Charter Treaty (1994)
ICSID ICSID Investment: Rights under a contract for the construction and operation of a major natural gas pipeline Nabucco, which was intended to enable gas transit from the Caspian Sea to Europe.

Summary: Claims arising out of the cancellation of a contract for the construction and operation of a major natural gas pipeline Nabucco.
Rights under a contract for the construction and operation of a major natural gas pipeline Nabucco, which was intended to enable gas transit from the Caspian Sea to Europe. Settled Turkey Austria Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply

Primary: B - Mining and quarrying
35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply

6 - Extraction of crude petroleum and natural gas
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 of the Proceeding dated 5 November 2015 None None None None None None
8 2015 Orange SA v. Jordan Orange SA v. Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan (ICSID Case No. ARB/15/10) France - Jordan BIT (1978) ICSID ICSID Investment: Majority shareholding in the Jordanian telecommunications company Orange S.A.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged discriminatory State actions in the procedure of renewal of the 15-year 2G license of the claimant's local subsidiary Orange S.A., the formerly state-owned Jordan Telecommunications Company (JTC).
Majority shareholding in the Jordanian telecommunications company Orange S.A. Settled Jordan France Tertiary: J - Information and communication 61 - Telecommunications Veeder, V. V. - President

Douglas, Z. - Respondent

Tschanz, P.-Y. - Claimant
Data not available Non-pecuniary relief Data not available Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability None None None None None None None
9 2015 Paz Holdings v. Bolivia Paz Holdings Ltd. v. Plurinational State of Bolivia Bolivia, Plurinational State of - United Kingdom BIT (1988) UNCITRAL None Investment: Shareholding of 36.6 per cent in a Bolivian enterprise (Iberbolivia) which was the majority shareholder in four Bolivian electricity companies (Electropaz, ELFEO, CADEB and EDESER).

Summary: Claims arising out of Bolivia’s Supreme Decree No. 1448 of 2012, which ordered the nationalization of claimant’s (indirectly-held) shares in four Bolivian electricity companies.
Shareholding of 36.6 per cent in a Bolivian enterprise (Iberbolivia) which was the majority shareholder in four Bolivian electricity companies (Electropaz, ELFEO, CADEB and EDESER). Settled Bolivia, Plurinational State of United Kingdom Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply Tribunal not constituted Data not available 19.51 mln USD Data not available Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability None None None None None None None
10 2015 Samsung v. Oman Samsung Engineering Co., Ltd. v. Sultanate of Oman (ICSID Case No. ARB/15/30) Korea, Republic of - Oman BIT (2003) ICSID ICSID Investment: Deposit in connection with the bid for a refinery improvement project.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged discriminatory treatment by the State towards the claimant in connection with the bidding process to undertake improvements to the Sohar refinery in northern Oman run by the state-owned Oman Refineries and Petroleum Industries Company (ORPIC) in 2013.
Deposit in connection with the bid for a refinery improvement project. Settled Oman Korea, Republic of Tertiary: F - Construction

Tertiary: F - Construction
41 - Construction of buildings

42 - Civil engineering
Heiskanen, V. - Respondent

Lalonde, M. - Claimant

McLachlan, C. A. - President
Data not available Data not available Data not available Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability Decision on the Respondent’s request to address the objections to jurisdiction as a preliminary question dated 4 August 2016

Award dated 17 January 2018
None None None None None None
11 2014 Beijing Urban Construction v. Yemen Beijing Urban Construction Group Co. Ltd. v. Republic of Yemen (ICSID Case No. ARB/14/30) China - Yemen BIT (1998) ICSID ICSID Investment: Rights under an agreement concluded between claimant and the Yemeni civil aviation and meteorology authority for the construction of an airport terminal.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged forced deprivation of claimant's assets and contract concerning a project for the construction of an airport terminal in Sana'a.
Rights under an agreement concluded between claimant and the Yemeni civil aviation and meteorology authority for the construction of an airport terminal. Settled Yemen China Tertiary: F - Construction 41 - Construction of buildings Townsend, J. M. - Claimant

Douglas, Z. - Respondent

Binnie, I. - President
114.00 mln USD Data not available Data not available Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability Decision on Jurisdiction dated 31 May 2017

Order taking note of the discontinuance of the proceeding pursuant to ICSID Arbitration Rule 43(1) dated 7 June 2018
None None None None None None
12 2014 Iberdrola v. Bolivia Iberdrola, S.A. and Iberdrola Energía, S.A.U. v. Plurinational State of Bolivia Bolivia, Plurinational State of - Spain BIT (2001) UNCITRAL PCA Investment: Shareholding of 63.4 per cent in a Bolivian enterprise (Iberbolivia) which was the majority shareholder in four Bolivian electricity companies (Electropaz, ELFEO, CADEB and EDESER).

Summary: Claims arising out of Bolivia’s Supreme Decree No. 1448 of 2012, which ordered the nationalization of claimants’ (indirectly-held) shares in four electricity companies.
Shareholding of 63.4 per cent in a Bolivian enterprise (Iberbolivia) which was the majority shareholder in four Bolivian electricity companies (Electropaz, ELFEO, CADEB and EDESER). Settled Bolivia, Plurinational State of Spain Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply Sepúlveda Amor, B. - President

García-Valdecasas, R. - Claimant

Bottini, G. - Respondent
Data not available 34.18 mln USD Direct expropriation

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

Full protection and security, or similar

Umbrella clause

National treatment

Most-favoured nation treatment

Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures
Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability None None None None None None None
13 2014 IBT Group and others v. Panama IBT Group LLC., Constructor, Consulting and Engineering (Panamá), S.A., and International Business and Trade, LLC. v. Republic of Panama (ICSID Case No. ARB/14/33) Panama - United States of America BIT (1982) ICSID ICSID Investment: Rights under a contract for the rehabilitation of four asphalt manufacturing plants held by claimants' subsidiary CCE.

Summary: Claims arising out of disagreements with Panama's Public Works Ministry concerning the performance of a concession to rehabilitate and operate four asphalt manufacturing enterprises held by claimants' subsidiary that led to the unilateral termination of the contract by Panama.
Rights under a contract for the rehabilitation of four asphalt manufacturing plants held by claimants' subsidiary CCE. Settled Panama United States of America Secondary: C - Manufacturing 23 - Manufacture of other non-metallic mineral products Alexandrov, S. A. - Claimant

Oreamuno Blanco, R. - Respondent

Remón Peñalver, J. - President
50.00 mln USD Data not available Data not available Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability None None None None None None None
14 2014 Longyear v. Canada J.M. Longyear, LLC v. Government of Canada NAFTA UNCITRAL Data not available Investment: Shareholding in a Canadian company, J.M. Longyear Canada, that operated an Ontario forestry land of approximately 63,000 acres.

Summary: Claims arising out of claimant's alleged ineligibility for tax reductions under an Ontario law, the Managed Forest Tax Incentive Program, on the basis that the majority of shares in Lonyear's local enterprise were not held by Canadian nationals.
Shareholding in a Canadian company, J.M. Longyear Canada, that operated an Ontario forestry land of approximately 63,000 acres. Settled Canada United States of America Primary: A - Agriculture, forestry and fishing 2 - Forestry and logging Data not available 12.00 mln USD Data not available Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

National treatment
Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability None None None None None None None
15 2014 Red Eléctrica v. Bolivia Red Eléctrica Internacional S.A.U. v. Plurinational State of Bolivia Bolivia, Plurinational State of - Spain BIT (2001) UNCITRAL Data not available Investment: Ownership and control (99 per cent shareholding) of Transportadora de Electricidad S.A. (TDE), a Bolivian electricity company.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's issuance of Supreme Decree No. 1214 that seized and nationalized an electricity transmission company controlled by the claimant.
Ownership and control (99 per cent shareholding) of Transportadora de Electricidad S.A. (TDE), a Bolivian electricity company. Settled Bolivia, Plurinational State of Spain Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply Tribunal not constituted 200.00 mln USD 36.50 mln USD Direct expropriation Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability Settlement Agreement dated 13 November 2014 None None None None None None
16 2013 Al Sharif v. Egypt (I) Ossama Al Sharif v. Arab Republic of Egypt (I) (ICSID Case No. ARB/13/3) Egypt - Jordan BIT (1996) ICSID ICSID Investment: Shareholding in the Sokhna Port Development Company that operates the Port of North El Sokhna.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged interference by the Government with claimant's investments in a port development project.
Shareholding in the Sokhna Port Development Company that operates the Port of North El Sokhna. Settled Egypt Jordan Tertiary: F - Construction

Tertiary: H - Transportation and storage
43 - Specialized construction activities

50 - Water transport
Tercier, P. - President

Schwebel, S. M. - Claimant

Thomas, J. C. - 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 pursuant to ICSID Arbitration Rule 43(1) issued dated 27 May 2015 None None None None None None
17 2013 Al Sharif v. Egypt (II) Ossama Al Sharif v. Arab Republic of Egypt (II) (ICSID Case No. ARB/13/4) Egypt - Jordan BIT (1996) ICSID ICSID Investment:

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged interference by the Government with claimant's investments in a customs system project.
Settled Egypt Jordan Tertiary: H - Transportation and storage 52 - Warehousing and support activities for transportation Cremades, B. M. - President

Price, D. M. - Claimant

Stern, B. - 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 pursuant to ICSID Arbitration Rule 43(1) issued dated 27 May 2015 None None None None None None
18 2013 Al Sharif v. Egypt (III) Ossama Al Sharif v. Arab Republic of Egypt (III) (ICSID Case No. ARB/13/5) Egypt - Jordan BIT (1996) ICSID ICSID Investment: Shareholding in the company Amiral Holdings, which formed part of the winning consortium for a 25-year concession to develop a bulk liquids terminal in East Port Said.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged interference by the Government with claimant's investments in a bulk liquids terminal project.
Shareholding in the company Amiral Holdings, which formed part of the winning consortium for a 25-year concession to develop a bulk liquids terminal in East Port Said. Settled Egypt Jordan Tertiary: H - Transportation and storage 52 - Warehousing and support activities for transportation Abraham, C. W. M. - President

Schwebel, S. M. - Claimant

Sands, P. - 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 pursuant to ICSID Arbitration Rule 43(1) issued dated 27 May 2015 None None None None None None
19 2013 ASA v. Egypt ASA International S.p.A. v. Arab Republic of Egypt (ICSID Case No. ARB/13/23) Egypt - Italy BIT (1989) ICSID ICSID Investment: Majority shareholding (85 per cent) in Ama Arab Environment Company that held two solid waste management contracts in Cairo.

Summary: Claims arising out of alleged Government measures that affected claimant's investment in a company that had concluded contracts for waste management services in Cairo.
Majority shareholding (85 per cent) in Ama Arab Environment Company that held two solid waste management contracts in Cairo. Settled Egypt Italy Tertiary: E - Water supply; sewerage, waste management and remediation activities 38 - Waste collection, treatment and disposal activities; materials recovery Oreamuno Blanco, R. - President

van den Berg, A. J. - Claimant

Hossain, K. - Respondent
Data not available Data not available Data not available Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability None None None None None None None
20 2013 Bryn Services v. Latvia Bryn Services Ltd. v. Latvia Latvia - Switzerland BIT (1992) Ad hoc None Investment: Deposit in a Latvian bank Latvijas Krājbanka.

Summary: Claims arising out of the takeover of a Latvian bank, Latvijas Krājbanka, by the State, and the claimant's inability to access its funds deposited in that bank.
Deposit in a Latvian bank Latvijas Krājbanka. Settled Latvia Switzerland Tertiary: K - Financial and insurance activities 64 - Financial service activities, except insurance and pension funding Caron, D. D. - President

Roney, D. - Claimant

Thomas, J. C. - Respondent
Data not available Data not available Data not available Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability None None None None None None None
21 2013 ČEZ v. Albania ČEZ v. The Republic of Albania The Energy Charter Treaty (1994) UNCITRAL None Investment: Majority shareholding (76 per cent) in the Albanian power distribution company CEZ Shpërndarje.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Albanian regulator's decision of 21 January 2013 to revoke the license of CEZ Shpĕrndrje, a power distribution company in which the claimant had invested, after a tariff-related dispute.
Majority shareholding (76 per cent) in the Albanian power distribution company CEZ Shpërndarje. Settled Albania Czech Republic Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply Paulsson, J. - President

Thomas, J. C. - Claimant

Gaillard, E. - Respondent
190.00 mln EUR (258.00 mln USD) 100.00 mln EUR (136.00 mln USD) Data not available Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability Data not available Data not available None None None None None
22 2013 Consolidated Exploration v. Kyrgyzstan Consolidated Exploration Holdings Ltd. and others v. Kyrgyz Republic (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/13/1) Kazakhstan - Kyrgyzstan BIT (1997)

CIS Investor Rights Convention (1997)
ICSID AF ICSID Investment: Majority shareholding (60 per cent) in Jerooyaltyn, a Kyrgyz company that entered into a joint venture with a State-owned company to develop the Jerooy gold deposit.

Summary: Claims arising out of a series of measures undertaken by the Government that allegedly expropriated claimant's investment in a gold deposit, such as annulling the licence to develop the deposit and terminating the underlying joint venture agreement.
Majority shareholding (60 per cent) in Jerooyaltyn, a Kyrgyz company that entered into a joint venture with a State-owned company to develop the Jerooy gold deposit. Settled Kyrgyzstan Kazakhstan

Seychelles

Denmark
Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 7 - Mining of metal ores Crook, J. R. - President

Hanotiau, B. - Claimant

Sands, P. - Respondent
500.00 mln USD Data not available Data not available Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability Award embodying the parties’ settlement agreement, pursuant to Article 53 of the ICSID Arbitration (Additional Facility) Rules dated 1 September 2015 None None None None None None
23 2012 Isolux v. Peru Isolux Corsán Concesiones S.A. v. Republic of Peru, ICSID Case No. ARB/12/5 Peru - Spain BIT (1994) ICSID ICSID Investment: Rights under two concession agreements to build an electrical transmission line in Peru.

Summary: Claims arising out of the modification of tender rules by Peru concerning the construction of an electrical transmission line allegedly designed to prevent further participation by the claimant after it had initially qualified, by requiring Isolux a higher bank guarantee as opposed to that required from other bidders.
Rights under two concession agreements to build an electrical transmission line in Peru. Settled Peru Spain Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply Perezcano Diaz, H. - President

Mourre, A. - Claimant

Grigera Naón, H. A. - Respondent
Data not available Data not available Data not available Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability Award embodying the parties' settlement agreement dated 25 March 2014 None None None None None None
24 2012 OTH v. Algeria Orascom Telecom Holding S.A.E v. People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria (PCA Case No. 2012-20) Algeria - Egypt BIT (1997) UNCITRAL PCA Investment: Shareholding in the telecommunications company Orascom Telecom Algeria.

Summary: Claims arising out of a series of alleged Government measures against Orascom, including a court judgment against it imposing a fine of approximately USD 1.3 billion and a criminal sentence against a member of OTA’s senior executive team.
Shareholding in the telecommunications company Orascom Telecom Algeria. Settled Algeria Egypt Tertiary: J - Information and communication 61 - Telecommunications Cremades, B. M. - President

Fortier, L. Y. - Claimant

Dupuy, P.-M. - Respondent
15000.00 mln USD Non-pecuniary relief Data not available Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability Award on Agreed Terms dated 12 March 2015 None None None None None None
25 2012 Repsol v. Argentina Repsol, S.A. and Repsol Butano, S.A. v. Argentine Republic (ICSID Case No. ARB/12/38) Argentina - Spain BIT (1991) ICSID ICSID Investment: Majority shareholding in the Argentinean oil company YPF.

Summary: Claims arising out of the issuance of Law no. 660/2012 and decree 660/2010 that expropriated Repsol's 51 per cent shareholding in an Argentinean oil company.
Majority shareholding in the Argentinean oil company YPF. Settled Argentina Spain Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 6 - Extraction of crude petroleum and natural gas von Wobeser, C. - President

Orrego Vicuña, F. - Claimant

Stern, B. - Respondent
10500.00 mln USD 5000.00 mln USD Direct expropriation Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability Settlement Agreement dated 20 March 2014

Order taking note of the discontinuance of the proceeding issued by the Tribunal dated 19 May 2014, pursuant to ICSID Arbitration Rule 44
None None None None None None