Panama
Results: 20
Results: 10
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2023 | Banesco v. Panama |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Panama | Spain |
2 | 2022 | Blue Sea and Oceans Group v. Panama |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Panama | United States of America |
3 | 2022 | Moussaieff v. Panama |
Investment: Concession contracts for three hydroelectric power plant projects (LALIN I, II and III) held respectively by Panama Power Energy Inc., Panama Energy Finance Inc. and Panama Energy Business Inc. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s 2017 termination of concession contracts for the construction and operation of three hydroelectric plants at the Gatú and Chorrillo rivers, in which the claimant had invested. |
Pending | Panama | United States of America |
4 | 2022 | Wu v. Panama |
Investment: Summary: |
Discontinued | Panama | United States of America |
5 | 2021 | IBT and others v. Panama (III) |
Investment: Investments in a construction project. Summary: |
Pending | Panama |
United States of America Spain |
6 | 2020 | Campos de Pesé v. Panama |
Investment: Investments in bioethanol production, land and facilities. Summary: Claims arising out of regulatory changes adopted by the Government that allegedly caused the claimant’s bioethanol business to cease operations, as well as environmental pollution charges brought against the claimant and the imposition of penalties. |
Pending | Panama | Italy |
7 | 2020 | IBT v. Panama (II) |
Investment: Investments in a construction project in Panama through Consorcio Cefere Panamá. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s termination of a contract with the claimants’ local company Consorcio Cefere Panamá for the construction of a women’s prison, and the imposition of a 3-year ban on the claimants to enter into any government contracts. |
Settled | Panama | United States of America |
8 | 2020 | Webuild v. Panama |
Investment: Shareholding in Grupo Unidos por el Canal (GUPC), the consortium in charge of the design and construction of the third set of locks within the Panama Canal expansion project. Summary: Claims arising out of the Panama Canal Authority’s (ACP) alleged breaches of the contract signed with the GUPC consortium for the construction of the third set of locks of the Panama Canal, including ACP’s alleged failure to co-finance extra costs incurred by the consortium. |
Pending | Panama | Italy |
9 | 2019 | Castillo v. Panama |
Investment: Shareholding in Seguros BBA, Corp., an insurance company based in Panama. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged forced liquidation of the insurance company Seguros BBA, in which the claimant held a stake, ordered by the regulatory authority for the insurance industry (Superintendencia de Seguros y Reaseguros de Panamá) in 2018. |
Decided in favour of State | Panama | Dominican Republic |
10 | 2019 | Enel Fortuna v. Panama |
Investment: Investments in the operation of a 300 megawatt hydroelectric power plant located on the Chiriquí River, in southwestern Panama. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s delay in the construction of electricity transmission infrastructure and the suspension of compensation payments due to the claimant under a 2014 agreement with the Ministry of Economy and Finance, related to local court proceedings brought by the national comptroller general contesting the constitutionality of the compensation agreement. |
Settled | Panama | Panama |
11 | 2018 | Sacyr v. Panama |
Investment: 41.6% share in Grupo Unidos por el Canal (GUPC), the consortium in charge of the design and construction of the third set of locks within the Panama Canal expansion project. Summary: Claims arising out of the Panama Canal Authority’s (ACP) alleged breaches of the contract signed with the GUPC consortium led by the claimant for the construction of the third set of locks of the Panama Canal, including ACP’s alleged failure to co-finance extra costs incurred by the consortium. |
Pending | Panama | Spain |
12 | 2017 | Buse v. Panama |
Investment: Majority shareholding in Panama Wall Street, S.A., a Panamanian brokerage firm. Summary: Claims arising out of a national financial oversight agency’s investigation into Panama Wall Street, a brokerage firm founded by the claimant in 2000, and its subsequent compulsory liquidation through Resolution SMV No. 371 of 2016. |
Pending | Panama | Netherlands |
13 | 2016 | Bridgestone v. Panama |
Investment: Investments in a tyre and rubber products enterprise and related registered trademarks. Summary: Claims arising out of a decision of the Supreme Court of Panama which held that Bridgestone’s motion to oppose the registration of the Riverstone trademark by tyre-maker Muresa had been in bad faith, and awarded USD 5.4 million in damages to Muresa. According to the claimants, their challenge to the trademark application was a good-faith effort due to the trademark’s similarity to two of Bridgestone’s own registered trademarks. |
Decided in favour of State | Panama | United States of America |
14 | 2016 | Dominion Minerals v. Panama |
Investment: Ownership of Cuprum Resources Corp., which held concession rights for the Cerro Chorcha mining property. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s refusal to extend a mining exploration concession for the Cerro Chorcha mining property in Western Panama. The concession was held by the claimant’s local subsidiary Cuprum under the 2006 contract with Panama, concluded for an initial period of four years with the possibility of renewal for two additional 2-year terms. The Ministry of Commerce and Industries issued a resolution rejecting the extension application and declared Cerro Chorcha a “mineral reserve” area on which all exploration or extraction work was prohibited. |
Decided in favour of investor | Panama | United States of America |
15 | 2016 | Omega Engineering and Rivera v. Panama |
Investment: Contracts for the construction of three medical hospitals, a higher education centre, a municipal hall, a court house and certain other facilities. Summary: Claims arising out of allegedly unfair treatment by the new Government, including non-payment for the construction of public buildings as well as criminal proceedings against the claimants relating to anti-corruption investigations. |
Decided in favour of State | Panama | United States of America |
16 | 2015 | Álvarez y Marín Corporación and others v. Panama |
Investment: Sole shareholders in Desarrollo Ecoturístico Cañaveral S.A., a real-estate company, which acquired 685 hectares of land in Panama for the development of a tourism project. Summary: Claims arising out of decisions by the Panamanian National Authority of Lands Administration (ANATI) allegedly contradicting prior authorizations and judicial decisions centering on whether the claimants’ investment is located within the indigenous protected area of Ngäbe-Buglé. |
Decided in favour of State | Panama |
Costa Rica Netherlands |
17 | 2014 | IBT Group and others v. Panama (I) |
Investment: Rights under a contract for the rehabilitation of four asphalt manufacturing plants held by claimants' subsidiary CCE. Summary: Claims arising out of disagreements with Panama's Public Works Ministry concerning the performance of a concession to rehabilitate and operate four asphalt manufacturing enterprises held by claimants' subsidiary that led to the unilateral termination of the contract by Panama. |
Settled | Panama | United States of America |
18 | 2013 | Transglobal v. Panama |
Investment: Indirect ownership interest (70 per cent) and control over a 50-year concession to operate the Bajo de Mina hydroelectric power plant. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's cancellation of a hydro-electric power plant concession and its alleged subsequent failure to abide by Panama Supreme Court's decision that reinstated the investor in its rights to the concession. |
Decided in favour of State | Panama | United States of America |
19 | 2006 | Nations Energy v. Panama |
Investment: Shareholding in a Panamanian company engaged in the generation, distribution and trading of electricity and related activities. Summary: Claims arising out of communications from Panama’s General Revenue Directorate and the Ministry of Economy and Finance that allegedly refused claimants the transfer of certain fiscal tax credits to third parties. |
Decided in favour of State | Panama | United States of America |
20 | 2003 | Parienti v. Panama |
Investment: Shareholding of 49.9 per cent in Terminal Nacional de Transporte Terrestre de Pasajeros para la Provincia de Colón, S. A., and whole ownership of De Lesseps Holding Corporation. Summary: Claims arising out of the Transit and Land Transport Authority’s decision not to award the company in which the claimant held shares a concession contract for the construction and operation of a land transportation terminal for the Province of Colón, despite a provisional concession for the project allegedly held by that company. According to the claimant, the concession was ultimately given to another company. |
Decided in favour of investor | Panama | France |
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2023 | Inversiones y Desarrollos Energéticos v. Honduras |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Honduras | Panama |
2 | 2021 | Energía y Renovación v. Guatemala |
Investment: Investments in two hydroelectric power plant projects (“Central Pojom II" and "Central San Andrés") in the municipality of San Mateo Ixtatán, and a transmission line (“Innovación Nor Occidente”). Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged failure to protect the claimant’s hydropower projects from local community protests, violent attacks and social unrest. |
Pending | Guatemala | Panama |
3 | 2019 | Enel Fortuna v. Panama |
Investment: Investments in the operation of a 300 megawatt hydroelectric power plant located on the Chiriquí River, in southwestern Panama. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s delay in the construction of electricity transmission infrastructure and the suspension of compensation payments due to the claimant under a 2014 agreement with the Ministry of Economy and Finance, related to local court proceedings brought by the national comptroller general contesting the constitutionality of the compensation agreement. |
Settled | Panama | Panama |
4 | 2019 | LARAH v. Uruguay |
Investment: Indirect shareholding of 75% in Pluna Líneas Aéreas Uruguayas S.A. (“Pluna”) via Leadgate Investment Corp., a subsidiary of the claimant. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s decision to nationalize and subsequently liquidate the airline Pluna in which Leadgate, the claimant’s private equity fund, held a majority stake. |
Pending | Uruguay | Panama |
5 | 2018 | Inversiones Continental v. Honduras |
Investment: Shareholding in Grupo Continental, a large locally-incorporated conglomerate with branches in banking, cattle, meat packing, real estate and cement production. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s seizure and forced liquidation of Banco Continental, S.A., held by the claimant as part of Grupo Continental’s conglomerate, due to alleged connections to money laundering and narcotics trafficking. The Government also allegedly placed other companies in the group’s various industry branches under administration. |
Pending | Honduras | Panama |
6 | 2016 | Corcoesto v. Spain |
Investment: Exploitation concessions for a gold mining project in Corcoesto, Spain. Summary: Claims arising out of a decision of the regional (Galician) Government to unilaterally terminate the claimant’s mining concessions for the Corcoesto gold project in the northwest of Spain. |
Decided in favour of State | Spain | Panama |
7 | 2016 | Silverton v. Dominican Republic |
Investment: Investments in development of residential coastal properties. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged failure to protect the claimant’s real estate business from an illegal development of an adjacent property which caused the claimant’s residential development to lose its panoramic views and entailed diminution in value. |
Discontinued | Dominican Republic | Panama |
8 | 2015 | Shanara and Marfield v. Mexico |
Investment: Ownership of vessels and leasing to a company carrying out offshore construction services. Summary: Claims arising out of precautionary injunction measures imposed by Mexico’s Attorney General on two vessels owned by claimants, preventing their navigation and movement. |
Pending | Mexico | Panama |
9 | 2014 | Highbury v. Venezuela (II) |
Investment: Rights under gold and diamond mining concession held by Caromin Venezuela and VMC Mining, companies controlled by the claimants. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation of two companies controlled by the claimants that held gold and diamond mining concessions, including the alleged forced takeover of the concession areas, the revocation of the concessions and non-payment of compensation. |
Discontinued | Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of |
Netherlands Panama |
10 | 2011 | Highbury v. Venezuela (I) |
Investment: Controlling shareholding in two Venezuelan subsidiary companies, Compañía Minera del Bajo Caroní and V.M.C. Mining Company, C.A., that held seven gold and diamonds mining concessions in Venezuela; rights under certain compensatory agreement. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's alleged coercive taking of the areas where claimants held mining concessions within the region of the Lower Caroní River without payment of compensation. |
Decided in favour of State | Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of |
Netherlands Panama |