Mauritius
Results: 4
Results: 15
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2018 | Doutremepuich v. Mauritius |
Investment: Ownership of three locally incorporated enterprises for the construction and operation of a forensic DNA and paternity testing laboratory in Mauritius. Summary: Claims arising out of the termination by the Government of the claimants’ project to open a new medical laboratory, after the Government had initially approved the project. |
Decided in favour of State | Mauritius | France |
2 | 2017 | Patel v. Mauritius |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Mauritius | India |
3 | 2016 | Gosling and others v. Mauritius |
Investment: Investments in two real estate projects (tourist resorts) in Le Morne and Pointe Jérôme. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s changes to its planning guidance policy and the designation of Le Morne area in southwest Mauritius as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 2008, with the claimants alleging that these actions rendered worthless their investments in two planned tourist resorts. |
Decided in favour of State | Mauritius | United Kingdom |
4 | 2015 | Rawat v. Mauritius |
Investment: Indirect controlling shareholding in an investment holding company (British American Investment Co. (Mtius) Ltd) with a subsidiary life insurance company (British American Insurance Company Ltd) and a bank (Bramer Banking Corporation Ltd). Summary: Claims arising out of a series of measures taken by the government of Mauritius, allegedly including the illegal appointment of special administrators who took control over two insurance and banking companies as well as related companies in which the claimant held interests, and the subsequent transfer or sale of their assets to state-owned companies and third parties. |
Decided in favour of State | Mauritius | France |
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2023 | Thomson and Pennyroyal v. Tanzania |
Investment: Investment in a real estate project. Summary: |
Pending | Tanzania, United Republic of |
United Kingdom Mauritius |
2 | 2022 | Devas v. India (II) |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | India | Mauritius |
3 | 2022 | Suffolk and others v. Portugal |
Investment: Loans to now-defunct local bank Banco Espírito Santo. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged failure to pay compensation owed to the claimants related to the government’s bailout and restructuring of Banco Espírito Santo, to which the claimants had provided loans. |
Pending | Portugal | Mauritius |
4 | 2022 | Suzor and SBEC v. Senegal |
Investment: Shareholding in Compagnie d’Electricité du Sénégal (CES), which operates the Sendou coal power plant in Bargny, Senegal. Summary: |
Pending | Senegal | Mauritius |
5 | 2021 | EEPL v. Congo |
Investment: Rights under an exploitation permit for the Badondo iron ore project and investments in the Mayoko-Moussoundji iron ore project. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s revocation of exploitation permits for two iron ore projects in which the claimant had invested. |
Pending | Congo | Mauritius |
6 | 2020 | GPIX v. India |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | India | Mauritius |
7 | 2020 | Maxis and Global Communications v. India |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | India |
Malaysia Mauritius |
8 | 2017 | Carissa v. India |
Investment: Summary: |
Discontinued | India | Mauritius |
9 | 2017 | LTME and Madamobil v. Madagascar |
Investment: Investment of alleged USD 60 million in providing telecommunications services in Madagascar (under the Life brand), including a licence to operate 3G mobile services received in 2008. Summary: Claims arising out of the revocation, in 2012, of Madamobil’s operating licence for telecommunication services. |
Decided in favour of State | Madagascar | Mauritius |
10 | 2016 | Astro and South Asia Entertainment v. India |
Investment: Investment in the Indian satellite TV company Sun Direct. Summary: Claims arising out of an allegedly unfair and biased criminal investigation by the Government relating to the suspected bribery by the claimants of Indian government officials. |
Discontinued | India |
United Kingdom Mauritius |
11 | 2013 | Courts v. Madagascar |
Investment: Summary: Claims arising out of claimants' investments in electronic goods and home furnishing facilities in Madagascar. |
Discontinued | Madagascar | Mauritius |
12 | 2013 | KHML v. India |
Investment: Minority shareholding (27 per cent) in Loop Telecom, a telecommunications company that held twenty one 2G licences in India. Summary: Claims arising out of the cancellation by India's Supreme Court of a telecoms licence held by a company in which the claimant had invested, and its reassignment through a public auction process. |
Pending | India | Mauritius |
13 | 2012 | Devas v. India (I) |
Investment: Shareholding in Devas Multimedia Private Limited, an Indian company that had concluded a telecommunication contract with an Indian state entity under the control of the Indian Space Research Organization. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged Government's cancellation of an agreement to lease capacity in the S-Band, part of the electromagnetic spectrum, for claimants' subsidiary to launch two satellites to provide multimedia services to mobile users across India. |
Decided in favour of investor | India | Mauritius |
14 | 2012 | Progas Energy v. Pakistan |
Investment: Company engaged in import operations of liquid petroleum gas in Pakistan. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged Government interference in operations at a gas import terminal at Port Qasim, leading to the alleged expropriation of claimant's liquid petroleum gas infrastructure in Karachi. |
Decided in favour of State | Pakistan | Mauritius |
15 | 2003 | Bechtel v. India |
Investment: Shareholding in local corporations established to operate the Dabhol power project in the state of Maharashtra, India. Summary: Claims arising out of an alleged reversal in the energy policy of the local government between the beginning of the power project in which the claimants invested and its intended consummation, as a result of political change in the Government. |
Settled | India | Mauritius |