Norway
Results: 3
Results: 5
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 | 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 |
3 | 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 |
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 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 |
2 | 2013 | Almås v. Poland |
Investment: Lease agreement with the Polish Agricultural Property Agency for 4200 hectares of farmland in Poland through Pol Farm, a company in which the claimants were the sole shareholders. Summary: Claims arising out of termination of a 30-year land lease by the Polish Agricultural Property Agency. |
Decided in favour of State | Poland | Norway |
3 | 2008 | Czechoslonor v. Czech Republic |
Investment: Ownership of a salmon-processing plant in the Czech Republic. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged Government's withdrawal of a bank loan agreement concluded with the investor which led to the declaration of bankruptcy of its company, and the alleged numerous irregular motions by Czech officials during the bankruptcy proceedings. |
Data not available | Czechia | Norway |
4 | 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 |
5 | 2004 | Telenor v. Hungary |
Investment: Direct and indirect holdings in local company (wholly- owned subsidiary) that had a concession agreement for telecommunications services. Summary: Claims arising out of a series of measures adopted by the respondent with respect to telecommunications service providers that allegedly affected the operation of a concession agreement for the provision of public mobile radiotelephone services concluded between claimant's wholly owned subsidiary and the Hungarian Minister of Transport, Communications and Water Management. |
Decided in favour of State | Hungary | Norway |