Latvia
Results: 10
Results: 5
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2021 | RSE v. Latvia (II) |
Investment: Investments in renewable energy projects. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged modification of its energy regulatory framework, including its renewable energy incentives programmes. |
Pending | Latvia | Switzerland |
2 | 2017 | Kazmin v. Latvia |
Investment: Investment in KVV Liepājas Metalurgs, a steel plant on Latvia’s west coast. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged misconduct concerning the tender process for a steel plant, which was acquired by the Ukrainian KVV Group, a company co-owned by the claimant, and subsequent actions that allegedly rendered the plant unprofitable and caused its insolvency in 2016. |
Discontinued | Latvia | Ukraine |
3 | 2017 | PNB Banka and others (formerly Norvik Banka) v. Latvia |
Investment: Majority shareholding in the Latvian bank AS PNB Banka (formerly AS Norvik Banka). Summary: Claims arising out of the sanctions imposed by the Government on the claimants’ bank for its alleged failure to comply with anti-money laundering and terrorist-financing regulations. |
Pending | Latvia | United Kingdom |
4 | 2016 | EBO Invest and others v. Latvia |
Investment: Shared ownership of SIA Rixport (72% belong to EBO Invest AS, 18% to Staur Eiendom and 10% to Rox Holding), a local company established for the development of the Riga Airport Business Park. Summary: Claims arising out of the actions of the Riga airport administration, a State-owned entity, relating to the claimants’ project to develop the Riga Airport Business Park. The investors undertook to construct a hotel connected to the airport under a lease agreement signed in 2006 and were granted exclusive rights to operate short-term parking at the airport. The projects have failed allegedly due to the airport administration’s frequent changes to its plans, reducing the scale of the airport expansion, routing railway tracks through the planned location of the hotel, and cancelling the investors’ rights to operate the parking. |
Decided in favour of State | Latvia | Norway |
5 | 2014 | Kuivallik v. Latvia |
Investment: 92.81% shareholding in the wind farm company LLC Winergy. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged mistreatment and ultimate hostile takeover of Winergy with the aid of Latvian authorities. |
Discontinued | Latvia | Estonia |
6 | 2014 | RSE v. Latvia (I) |
Investment: Summary: Claims arising out the alleged mistreatment of the claimant relating to the takeover of a Latvian bank, Parex Bank, and its subsequent division into two successor institutions. |
Discontinued | Latvia | Switzerland |
7 | 2013 | Bryn Services v. Latvia |
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. |
Settled | Latvia | Switzerland |
8 | 2012 | E energija v. Latvia |
Investment: Rights under a 30-year lease agreement concluded between the claimant and the local authority of Rezekne to review, upgrade and operate a heating supply system. Summary: Claims arising out of the early termination of a lease agreement by the authorities of Rezekne, followed by the alleged nationalization of a heating and hot water supply system in which the claimant had invested. |
Decided in favour of investor | Latvia | Lithuania |
9 | 2001 | Nykomb v. Latvia |
Investment: Ownership of local joint stock company holding contractual rights with a State enterprise for an investment project. Summary: Claims arising out of a dispute over the purchase price to be paid under a contract entered into between claimant's subsidiary and a State enterprise for the building of a cogeneration plant in Latvia. |
Decided in favour of investor | Latvia | Sweden |
10 | 1999 | Swembalt v. Latvia |
Investment: Ownership of vessel for the rental of accommodation and office space. Summary: Claims arising out of the loss of a vessel owned by the claimant which was moored in the Port of Riga with the permission of the relevant Latvian authorities and in accordance with a land lease agreement with the Kurzeme district of Riga. |
Decided in favour of investor | Latvia | Sweden |
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2023 | Baltjura-Serviss v. Norway |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Norway | Latvia |
2 | 2020 | Pildegovics and North Star v. Norway |
Investment: Investments in a snow crab harvesting enterprise, shares in local company Sea & Coast AS, and supply agreements with Seagourmet Norway AS. Summary: Claims arising out of Government authorities’ interference with the claimants’ snow crab harvesting business, allegedly forcing them to cease their operations in the so-called Barents Sea Loophole and the maritime zones of the Svalbard archipelago, including through the arrest of the one of the claimants’ ships, criminal proceedings, fines and penalties. |
Decided in favour of State | Norway | Latvia |
3 | 2018 | Roščins v. Lithuania |
Investment: Summary: |
Discontinued | Lithuania | Latvia |
4 | 2011 | Belokon v. Kyrgyzstan |
Investment: Ownership of Manas Bank, a Kyrgyzstani financial institution. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation of a local bank owned by the claimant, following the long-term imposition of a special administrator during governmental investigations of the bank concerning financial fraud. |
Decided in favour of investor | Kyrgyzstan | Latvia |
5 | 2005 | Amto v. Ukraine |
Investment: Majority shareholding in Ukrainian company that had concluded several maintenance contracts with the State-owned nuclear energy company Energoatom for the repair of high-voltage electrical equipment. Summary: Claims arising out of the bankruptcy of the Zaporozhskaya nuclear power plant in eastern Ukraine and its default under contracts to claimant's subsidiary for maintenance works carried out at such plant; particularly, the alleged prevention by Ukrainian bankruptcy law and the conduct of these bankruptcy proceedings from enforcing several court orders obtained by claimant's subsidiary against the State-owned company. |
Decided in favour of State | Ukraine | Latvia |