Kazakhstan
Results: 19
Results: 7
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2018 | Windoor v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Contract with a local company, “Baltiiski Dom”, to design, manufacture, supply and install glass-aluminium structures for the construction of a façade of a business and conference center in Astana. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged failure to enforce payment of a guarantee issued by state-owned company “Diplomat Stroi Servis” for a real estate project involving the claimant and a local company. Allegedly, the local company had failed to make payments due under the construction contract and the claimant was unable to collect the guarantee, despite having obtained an SCC arbitration award against “Diplomat Stroi Servis” to cover the debt. |
Pending | Kazakhstan | Estonia |
2 | 2017 | Big Sky Energy v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Indirect shareholding through Canadian subsidiary Big Sky Energy Kazakhstan Ltd. (“Big Sky Canada”) in Kazakhstani oil and gas company Kozhan LLP, which held exploration and development rights to three oil fields in Kazakhstan. Summary: Claims arising out of a series of alleged illegal actions by the Government and its courts, including domestic judicial proceedings through which Big Sky Canada allegedly lost its 100 per cent shareholding in Kozan to the original Kazakhstani shareholders, without being compensated for the dispossession. |
Decided in favour of State | Kazakhstan | United States of America |
3 | 2016 | Alhambra v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Rights under two gold mining licences held by the claimants’ local subsidiary, Joint Venture Saga Creek Gold Company LLP, and an exploration and exploitation contract with the Republic of Kazakhstan. Summary: Claims arising out of an allegedly unlawful assessment of taxes on the claimants’ local subsidiary Saga Creek, the withholding of required mining and financing approvals and other actions of the Government, which allegedly culminated in the bankruptcy of Saga Creek in 2015. |
Decided in favour of investor | Kazakhstan |
Netherlands Canada |
4 | 2016 | Gold Pool v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Management contract rights to operate certain gold mines in Kazakhstan. Summary: Claims arising out of the allegedly wrongful termination in 1997 of the claimant’s management contract rights to operate certain gold mines in Kazakhstan. |
Decided in favour of State | Kazakhstan | Canada |
5 | 2015 | Aktau Petrol v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Ownership of enterprise engaged in oil transportation. Summary: Claims arising out of a series of measures taken by the respondent's courts, which allegedly resulted in the unlawful transfer of claimant's assets to a third party, connected to the government. |
Decided in favour of investor | Kazakhstan | Türkiye |
6 | 2015 | Hourani v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Ownership of pharmaceuticals manufacturer, Pharm Industry. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged unlawful expropriation and liquidation of a pharmaceuticals manufacturer, Pharm Industry including the alleged seizure of a 10-hectare plot of land transferred from Issam Hourani to Pharm Industry as well as the annulment of a decree that had granted Pharm Industry ownership of a 42-hectare plot of land. |
Settled | Kazakhstan |
United Kingdom United States of America |
7 | 2015 | Mağdenli v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Shareholding of 50 per cent in “ATMA - Atyrau Airport and Transportation” JSC, a local joint venture company providing services in the aviation sector. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged measures to deprive the claimant of its business in aircraft refueling, cargo handling and helicopter services at the Atyrau airport. The Government allegedly established another airport operator. |
Decided in favour of State | Kazakhstan | Türkiye |
8 | 2013 | WWM and Carroll v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Rights under a contract concluded with the Government to operate one of Kazakhstan's largest uranium-processing facilities. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's alleged failure to observe its contractual obligations, including the granting of an export license to WWM to market Kazakh uranium internationally, which allegedly led WWM to suspend operations at its Kazakh facility and resulted in the bankruptcy, confiscation and forced sale of its local assets. |
Decided in favour of investor | Kazakhstan | Canada |
9 | 2011 | TPAO v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Shareholding in the joint venture KazakhTurkMunai with Kazakh state entity KazMunaiGas that held oil exploration and production licenses. Summary: Claims arising out of Government's measures allegedly affecting claimant's investment in an oil exploration and production joint venture which held exploration and production activities in seven oil fields in the Mangistau and Aktobe regions in Kazakhstan. |
Settled | Kazakhstan | Türkiye |
10 | 2010 | AES v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Ownership of a number of power facilities and trading companies that held rights under long-term concessions concluded with the Government. Summary: Claims arising out of a series of actions including fines and tariff restrictions imposed to claimants by Kazakh competition authorities concerning energy prices that allegedly had adverse financial impacts on the company’s operations in the country. |
Decided in favour of neither party (liability found but no damages awarded) | Kazakhstan |
United States of America Netherlands |
11 | 2010 | Stati and others v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Rights under certain subsoil use contracts held by Ascom's local operating companies, KPM and TNG; capital contributions for oil exploration and development; assets and infrastructure related to oil field operations, including a Liquid Petroleum Gas plant. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged campaign of harassment by the Kazakh State which culminated with the abrupt cancellation of oil and gas exploration contracts held by claimant's local operating companies, followed by the seizure of its Kazakh assets. |
Decided in favour of investor | Kazakhstan |
Moldova, Republic of Romania Gibraltar |
12 | 2009 | GEM v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Shareholding in the Kazakh entity BTA Bank. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's alleged forced nationalization of claimant's interest in BTA Bank, by means of Kazakhstan's acquisition of around 75 per cent of the shares of BTA through the National Welfare Fund Samruk-Kazyna. |
Data not available | Kazakhstan | Switzerland |
13 | 2009 | KT Asia v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Minority shareholding in the Kazakh entity BTA Bank. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's alleged forced nationalization of claimant's interest in BTA Bank, by means of Kazakhstan's acquisition of around 75 per cent of the shares of BTA through the National Welfare Fund Samruk-Kazyna. |
Decided in favour of State | Kazakhstan | Netherlands |
14 | 2008 | Caratube v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Rights under an oil exploration and production contract concluded between the Kazakh Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources and a company which later assigned such contractual rights to Caratube, owned and controlled in its majority by a U.S. national. Summary: Claims arising out of the termination by the Government of Caratube’s licence to an oilfield in Kazakhstan and allegations that the investor had been continuously harassed by the authorities. |
Decided in favour of State | Kazakhstan | United States of America |
15 | 2007 | Liman Caspian Oil v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Rights under a license to explore and extract hydrocarbons in Kazakhstan acquired by one of the claimants though an assignment agreement. Summary: Claims arising out of the transfer of claimants' license to explore and extract hydrocarbons in the Liman block in Western Kazakhstan. |
Decided in favour of State | Kazakhstan | Netherlands |
16 | 2005 | Rumeli v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Shareholding in a local Kazakh telecoms company that had been awarded a license to operate the second mobile telephone network in Kazakhstan; know-how and marketing services in the field of telecommunications; guarantors of loans made by the locally-incorporated investment company. Summary: Claims arising out of the government's termination of an investment contract for the creation and exploration of digital cellular radiotelephone connection on Kazakhstan. |
Decided in favour of investor | Kazakhstan | Türkiye |
17 | 2001 | AIG v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Ownership and/or direct control of an investment vehicle company, a financing company and a joint venture established to invest in certain real estate project. Summary: Claims arising out of the cancellation of a project for the development of a residential housing complex, and the subsequent transfer of the project's property to the City of Almaty without compensation, on the basis that the land concerned was required for a national arboretum. |
Decided in favour of investor | Kazakhstan | United States of America |
18 | 2001 | CCL Oil v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Concession agreement for use and management of certain State's shareholding. Summary: Claims arising out of the termination of a concession agreement for use and management of the State's shareholding in an oil refinery. |
Decided in favour of State | Kazakhstan | United States of America |
19 | 1996 | Biedermann v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Oil concession agreement to develop the Kenbai field in the Atyrau region. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's termination of an oil concession agreement entered into with the claimant. |
Decided in favour of investor | Kazakhstan | United States of America |
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2020 | QazaqGaz v. Kyrgyzstan |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Kyrgyzstan | Kazakhstan |
2 | 2019 | Kazakh National Center v. Kyrgyzstan |
Investment: Summary: |
Decided in favour of State | Kyrgyzstan | Kazakhstan |
3 | 2017 | KazTransGas v. Georgia |
Investment: Ownership of KazTransGas-Tbilisi LLP (100% shareholding), a natural gas distribution company. Summary: Claims arising out of Georgian authorities’ appointment of a Special Administrator of the claimant’s local subsidiary KazTransGas-Tbilisi in 2009, resulting in the claimant’s loss of control over the subsidiary that was supplying natural gas to the capital of Georgia and adjacent regions under a 2005 investment memorandum signed with the Georgian Ministry of Economic Development. |
Settled | Georgia | Kazakhstan |
4 | 2013 | Consolidated Exploration v. Kyrgyzstan |
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. |
Settled | Kyrgyzstan |
Kazakhstan Seychelles Denmark |
5 | 2013 | Kim and others v. Uzbekistan |
Investment: Indirect majority shareholding in two Uzbek cement companies, JSC Bekabadcement and JSC Kuvasaycement, through a Cypriot holding company, United Cement Group Plc. Summary: Claims arising out of a series of regulatory and judicial measures taken by different branches of the Uzbek government, including criminal investigations, allegedly leading to the unlawful nationalisation of two cement companies in which the claimants had invested. |
Settled | Uzbekistan | Kazakhstan |
6 | 2013 | OKKV v. Kyrgyzstan |
Investment: Rights to use land and monetary contributions towards building a tourist complex. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation of a project to build a cultural and accommodation centre on the shores of Issyk Kul, known as the Avrora Green resort and residential complex. |
Decided in favour of investor | Kyrgyzstan | Kazakhstan |
7 | 2011 | BTA Bank v. Kyrgyzstan |
Investment: Majority shareholding (71%) in the local bank BTA Bank CJSC. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged illegal acquisition of claimant's interests in a bank by a Kyrgyz court in May 2012. |
Settled | Kyrgyzstan | Kazakhstan |