Lithuania
Results: 8
Results: 8
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2023 | Belaruskali v. Lithuania |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Lithuania | Belarus |
2 | 2019 | Russian Fund v. Lithuania |
Investment: Majority shareholding (68% of shares held by Vladimir Antonov) in Bankas Snoras, a now defunct Lithuanian bank. Summary: Claims arising out of the nationalization of Snoras bank in 2011 related to purported insolvency risks and suspected criminal activity, and the bank’s ensuing liquidation. |
Decided in favour of State | Lithuania | Russian Federation |
3 | 2018 | Roščins v. Lithuania |
Investment: Summary: |
Discontinued | Lithuania | Latvia |
4 | 2016 | Veolia and others v. Lithuania |
Investment: Ownership of local subsidiaries in the heating and electrical power generation industry, Vilniaus Energija and Litesko. Summary: Claims arising out allegedly unfair and discriminatory changes in laws and regulations. |
Pending | Lithuania | France |
5 | 2012 | Gazprom v. Lithuania |
Investment: Minority shareholding in a Lithuanian gas distribution company. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged forced sale of Gazprom's stake in Lietuvos Dujos, Lithuania's gas distribution company, in the context of an EU-mandated gas market reform. |
Discontinued | Lithuania | Russian Federation |
6 | 2010 | Bosca v. Lithuania |
Investment: Know-how by way of providing services to wine producing company in Lithuania; "making of contract" rights as winner of a public tender for the acquisition of a sparkling wines manufacturing company. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's annulment of claimant's successful bid for the company AB Alita, a Lithuanian alcoholic beverage producer. |
Decided in favour of neither party (liability found but no damages awarded) | Lithuania | Italy |
7 | 2007 | Kaliningrad v. Lithuania |
Investment: Ownership of a building in Lithuania. Summary: Claims arising out of the seizure of a Lithuanian-based building owned by the Kaliningrad regional government by order of Lithuanian courts enforcing a LCIA arbitral award previously rendered against the claimant. |
Decided in favour of State | Lithuania | Russian Federation |
8 | 2005 | Parkerings v. Lithuania |
Investment: Rights under a public parking concession agreement concluded between the City of Vilnius and claimant's wholly-owned Lithuanian subsidiary, acting as part of a bidding consortium. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged repudiation by the Lithuanian municipality of Vilnius of an agreement entered into with the investor concerning a public parking system. |
Decided in favour of State | Lithuania | Norway |
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2022 | Arctic Fishing v. Norway |
Investment: Investments in three snow crab-fishing vessels with fishing rights in maritime zones administered by Norway. Summary: Claims arising out of Government authorities’ interference with the claimant’s snow crab harvesting business, including through the arrest of the claimant’s fishing vessels “Jūros Vilkas” and the dispossession of the claimant’s fishing rights. |
Pending | Norway | Lithuania |
2 | 2022 | Ershova and Jeršov v. Bulgaria |
Investment: Investments in “Petrol” AD JSC, a local oil and gas company, through a shareholding in “Petrol Holding” AD. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged wrongful acts and omissions related to the investments of the claimants’ late father Denis Jeršov in “Petrol” and “Petrol Holding”, including the Government’s failure to halt the fraudulent sale of Petrol shares to a third party. According to the claimants, this led to Jeršov’s loss of control over Petrol, the bankruptcy Petrol Holding and the destruction of Jeršov’s investments. |
Pending | Bulgaria | Lithuania |
3 | 2021 | Pavilniu and Modus v. Belarus |
Investment: Investment in a hotel construction project near the Minsk national airport. Summary: |
Decided in favour of State | Belarus | Lithuania |
4 | 2020 | Aleksandravicius v. Denmark |
Investment: Investments in local construction company, DS Byggeri APS. Summary: Claims arising out of the local police’s failure to take action against labour union protests at a construction site targeting the claimant’s company, DS Byggeri. According to the claimant, the protesters damaged the company’s construction equipment and caused harm to its scaffolding business. |
Discontinued | Denmark | Lithuania |
5 | 2020 | Garsų Pasaulis v. Kyrgyzstan |
Investment: Investments in a security printing business. Summary: Claims arising out of State authorities’ decision to halt the signature of a contract to produce biometric passports for Kyrgyz citizens that the claimant had won through a public tender. |
Pending | Kyrgyzstan | Lithuania |
6 | 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 |
7 | 2009 | ARVI and SANITEX v. Serbia |
Investment: Shareholding in the Serbian fertiliser manufacturer HIP Azatora acquired under certain privatisation agreement concluded between the Government and a Serbian investor. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation of claimants' shares in a Serbian fertilizer company. |
Decided in favour of investor | Serbia | Lithuania |
8 | 2002 | Tokios Tokelés v. Ukraine |
Investment: Ownership of local publishing company. Summary: Claims arising out of certain alleged retaliatory actions by the respondent for a publication concerning an Ukrainian opposition politician, including document seizures, public accusations of illegal conduct, judicial actions to invalidate contracts and seizure of assets. |
Decided in favour of State | Ukraine | Lithuania |