Poland
Results: 37
Results: 8
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2020 | LC Corp v. Poland |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Poland | Netherlands |
2 | 2020 | Prairie v. Poland |
Investment: Ownership of the Jan Karski and Debiensko coal mines, holding exploration and mining concessions. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged actions to block the claimant’s coking coal projects at the Jan Karski and Debiensko mines. |
Pending | Poland | Australia |
3 | 2019 | Mercuria v. Poland (II) |
Investment: Ownership of local subsidiary J&S Energy S.A. (“JSE”), a company importing and trading in petrochemicals. Summary: Claims arising out of a government agency’s imposition of a financial penalty on the claimant’s subsidiary JSE, which Polish administrative courts later overturned, and the government agency’s subsequent failure to repay accrued interest to the claimant upon the reimbursement of the penalty. |
Decided in favour of investor | Poland | Cyprus |
4 | 2018 | Festorino and others v. Poland |
Investment: Ownership (100%) of Blue Gas N’R’G Holding sp. z o.o., holding four Blue Gas subsidiaries to develop six natural gas mining projects with power plants (Uników, Wrzosowo, Stanowice, Międzyzdroje, Zakrzewo and Lelików). Summary: Claims arising out of Government authorities’ alleged arbitrary and discriminatory conduct in administrative proceedings to grant licenses for the claimants’ gas exploration and mining projects. According to the claimants, Government authorities caused unjustified delays that resulted in the bankruptcy and shutdown of Blue Gas subsidiaries. |
Decided in favour of State | Poland |
Austria Cyprus Czechia Switzerland |
5 | 2018 | Invenergy v. Poland |
Investment: Investments in wind energy projects in Poland. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s conduct adversely affecting the claimant’s wind energy projects, including termination by Polish State-owned companies of long-term energy contracts concluded with the claimant. |
Pending | Poland | United States of America |
6 | 2017 | Airbus v. Poland |
Investment: Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s cancellation of a contract to purchase helicopters from the claimant. |
Discontinued | Poland | Netherlands |
7 | 2017 | Honwood v. Poland |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Poland | Cyprus |
8 | 2017 | Ojeocan v. Poland |
Investment: Summary: |
Decided in favour of State | Poland | Cyprus |
9 | 2017 | Slot v. Poland |
Investment: Investments in the gambling industry. Summary: Claims arising out of Poland’s Gambling Law of 2009, which entered into force in January 2010 and restricted the operation of slot machines outside of casinos. |
Decided in favour of investor | Poland | Czechia |
10 | 2016 | Darley v. Poland |
Investment: Investments in preparations for, and participation in, a Government tender for a potash concession. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s decision to deny a potash mining concession to the claimant and to grant it to the partly State-owned mining company KGHM, allegedly in violation of the tender process. |
Settled | Poland | United Kingdom |
11 | 2015 | Manchester Securities v. Poland |
Investment: Loan to a Polish real estate developer for the construction of an apartment complex in Krakow, Poland. Summary: Claims arising out of the Polish courts’ decision concerning an unfinished apartment complex in Krakow, allegedly resulting in the claimant’s inability to collect its debt from the developer of that complex. |
Decided in favour of investor | Poland | United States of America |
12 | 2015 | Miedzi Copper v. Poland |
Investment: Ownership of Miedzi Copper Corp. that holds a number of copper exploration concessions in Poland. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged revocation of two copper exploitation permits awarded to the claimant’s local subsidiary Miedzi Copper and the subsequent allocation of the permits to Poland’s largest copper producer KGHM. |
Data not available | Poland | Canada |
13 | 2014 | Flemingo DutyFree v. Poland |
Investment: Indirect 80.68% shareholding in BH Travel Retail Poland Sp. z o.o. (“BH Travel”), which held certain lease agreements for retail stores at Warsaw Chopin Airport. Summary: Claims arising out of the Polish Airports State Enterprise’s termination of lease agreements for retail stores at Warsaw Chopin Airport entered into with BH Travel, a duty-free operator in which the claimant held indirect interests. |
Decided in favour of investor | Poland | India |
14 | 2014 | Griffin v. Poland |
Investment: Usufruct rights to a plot of land. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation of the claimant’s rights to a historic former barracks site adjacent to Lazienki Park in central Warsaw, including alleged arbitrary conduct of the City of Warsaw related to construction works on the site and a decision of the Warsaw Court of Appeal confirming the termination of the claimant’s usufruct rights to the property. |
Decided in favour of State | Poland | Luxembourg |
15 | 2014 | Horthel and others v. Poland |
Investment: Shareholding in companies operating slot machines. Summary: Claims arising out of Poland’s Gambling Law of 2009 restricting the operation of slot machines outside of casinos, which forced companies controlled by the claimants to stop operating most of their slot machines following the law's entry into force in January 2010 and to abandon all operations by January 2015. |
Decided in favour of investor | Poland | Netherlands |
16 | 2014 | PL Holdings v. Poland |
Investment: 99.6% shareholding in a Polish bank, FM Bank PBP. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged forced sale of the claimant's shareholding in a Polish bank, FM Bank PBP. |
Decided in favour of investor | Poland | Luxembourg |
17 | 2014 | Strabag and others v. Poland |
Investment: Indirect shareholding in Hotele Warszawakie “Syrena” Sp. z.o.o. (Syrena Hotels), a local company operating two hotels in Warsaw (Hotel Polonia and Hotel Metropol). Summary: Claims arising out of Polish authorities’ alleged denial of legal titles to two hotels and related land plots in Warsaw that were held by Syrena Hotels, a formerly state-owned entity that the claimants had acquired during a privatization process; the legal titles were transferred to the successors of previous property owners. According to the claimants, government authorities had concealed contentious ownership issues prior to their acquisition of Syrena Hotels. |
Settled | Poland | Austria |
18 | 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 |
19 | 2013 | Juvel and Bithell v. Poland |
Investment: Shareholding in Polish telecommunications company Sferia S.A. Summary: Claims arising out of certain decisions by Poland’s Office of Electronic Communications which allegedly resulted in Sferia’s inability to effectively use radio frequencies in the 850 MHz band to develop an LTE mobile phone network. |
Decided in favour of State | Poland | Cyprus |
20 | 2012 | Enkev Beheer v. Poland |
Investment: Investment in Polish subsidiary, Enkev Polska S.A., a joint stock company owning certain industrial facilities and holding a perpetual usufruct right to the property under Polish law for the use of the land as real property for 99 years. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged threats made by the Respondent to expropriate the claimant’s investment in its Polish subsidiary. |
Decided in favour of State | Poland | Netherlands |
21 | 2012 | Seventhsun and others v. Poland |
Investment: 62% shareholding in Polish steel manufacturer, Huta Pokoj. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged freeze of the claimants' shareholding by the Polish Public Prosecutor's Office related to criminal proceedings. |
Decided in favour of State | Poland | Cyprus |
22 | 2011 | Ryan and others v. Poland |
Investment: Interests in a vegetable oil production and processing enterprise. Summary: Claims arising out of a series of Governmental actions that allegedly caused the bankruptcy of a margarine production company in which the claimant had invested. |
Decided in favour of State | Poland | United States of America |
23 | 2010 | Minnotte and Lewis v. Poland |
Investment: Shareholding in company set up to construct and operate a plasma protein fractionation plant in southern Poland. Summary: Claims arising out of a series of alleged actions by the Polish ministry of finance aimed at ensuring that certain banks discontinued their financing of a construction project for the development of a plasma processing plant in which the claimant had invested. |
Decided in favour of State | Poland | United States of America |
24 | 2009 | East Cement v. Poland |
Investment: Interests in a cement production facility. Summary: Claims arising out of a decision by a Polish bankruptcy court concerning claimant's alleged investment in a cement manufacturing plant. |
Discontinued | Poland | Jordan |
25 | 2009 | Servier v. Poland |
Investment: Data not available Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's withdrawal of Servier’s marketing authorisations for certain medicines, in the context of Poland’s accession to the European Union and its enactment of a series of legislative and administrative reforms to harmonise its regulation of pharmaceuticals with that of the European Union. |
Decided in favour of investor | Poland | France |
26 | 2008 | Mercuria Energy v. Poland (I) |
Investment: Ownership of a Polish subsidiary, J&S Energy, engaged in the import, distribution and marketing of oil products. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's implementation of a European Union Directive calling for an increase in the mandatory fuel reserves held by firms and its alleged negative impact upon Mercuria's Polish subsidiary J&S Energy engaged in the importation of fuel. |
Decided in favour of State | Poland | Cyprus |
27 | 2008 | TRACO v. Poland |
Investment: Data not available Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation and discriminatory treatment to claimant's investment in the privatized company Przedsiębiorstwo Kamienia Budowlanego engaged in the Polish stone industry in Radków. |
Decided in favour of State | Poland | Germany |
28 | 2006 | Nordzucker v. Poland |
Investment: Intended acquisition of two sugar production plants in Poland, including the payment of a guarantee deposited with certain sugar holding companies in its capacity of bidder for the companies' shares. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's implementation of a privatization programme for its sugar industry and its alleged retraction from selling Nordzucker two state-owned sugar producers (including a total of five production plants), which would have increased the claimant's total market-share to 20 per cent of Poland's sugar industry. |
Decided in favour of neither party (liability found but no damages awarded) | Poland | Germany |
29 | 2006 | Vivendi v. Poland |
Investment: Interests in a Polish joint venture engaged in the telecommunications sector. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged mishandling by Polish courts of a number of lawsuits arising out of a commercial dispute over the ownership of a cellular communications company. |
Settled | Poland | France |
30 | 2004 | Cargill v. Poland |
Investment: Ownership and operation of isoglucose sweetener production facilities in Poland. Summary: Claims arising out of Poland’s imposition of quotas on isoglucose (a wheat-derived sweetener which competes with sugar), which adversely affected Cargill’s investment in isoglucose-processing facilities. |
Decided in favour of investor | Poland | United States of America |
31 | 2003 | Eureko v. Poland |
Investment: Shareholding in an insurance enterprise owned by the Polish State Treasury. Summary: Claims arising out of the privatisation of a Polish insurance company and subsequent alleged actions by the Minister of the State Treasury of Poland which negatively affected the corporate governance of the company in which the claimants had invested. |
Settled | Poland | Netherlands |
32 | 2001 | Crespo and others v. Poland |
Investment: Investments in an agri-food business. Summary: Claims arising out of the Polish tax authority’s blocking of funds on the claimants’ bank accounts, related to the collection of corporate taxes allegedly due to the state. |
Decided in favour of neither party (liability found but no damages awarded) | Poland | Spain |
33 | 1998 | Schaper v. Poland |
Investment: Shareholding in company engaged in the import of waste-paper into Poland. Summary: Claims arising out of the prohibition on importation of raw material waste paper pursuant to a statutory amendment concerning environmental protection. |
Discontinued | Poland | Germany |
34 | 1996 | Ameritech v. Poland |
Investment: Shareholding in local cellular phone company. Summary: Claims arising out of certain telecommunications statutory enactment overturning a Government's letter of intent which contained Poland's commitment to award the claimant digital cellular licenses. |
Settled | Poland | United States of America |
35 | 1996 | France Telecom v. Poland |
Investment: Shareholding in local cellular phone company. Summary: Claims arising out of certain telecommunications statutory enactment overturning a Government's letter of intent which contained Poland's commitment to award the claimant digital cellular licenses. |
Settled | Poland | France |
36 | 1996 | Saar Papier v. Poland (II) |
Investment: Ownership of local subsidiary company for import of waste-paper into Poland. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged damages for a subsequent time period during which Poland had continued to block Saar Papier's operations, despite a prior arbitration award rendered in favour of the investor. |
Decided in favour of State | Poland | Germany |
37 | 1994 | Saar Papier v. Poland (I) |
Investment: Ownership of local subsidiary company for import of waste-paper into Poland. Summary: Claims arising out of the prohibition on importation of raw material waste paper pursuant to a statutory amendment concerning environmental protection. |
Decided in favour of investor | Poland | Germany |
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2016 | Grot and others v. Moldova |
Investment: Rights under lease agreements for agricultural land concluded with landowners for a 3-year period. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged unlawful termination of the lease agreements for agricultural land concluded by the claimants with the landowners in two villages in the north-east of Moldova. A year after the agreements had been concluded, the respective local city halls revoked the registration of the agreements due to the claimants’ alleged non-performance of their contractual obligations, and registered lease agreements with a different lessee for the same land plots. |
Decided in favour of investor | Moldova, Republic of |
United States of America Poland |
2 | 2016 | Muszynianka v. Slovakia |
Investment: Investments in mineral water production. Summary: Claims arising out of the 2014 change to the Slovakian Constitution that forbade cross-border bulk transportation of drinking and mineral water derived from Slovak water sources and the rejection of the claimant’s application for a mineral water extraction permit. These actions allegedly frustrated the claimant’s venture to extract and transport (via pipeline) mineral water from a source in Slovakia to its bottling plant in a neighbouring town in Poland. |
Decided in favour of neither party (liability found but no damages awarded) | Slovakia | Poland |
3 | 2014 | Aleksandrowicz and Częścik v. Cyprus |
Investment: Summary: Claims arising out of measures taken by the Government in March 2013 in relation to the claimants’ bank accounts at the Bank of Cyprus. |
Decided in favour of State | Cyprus | Poland |
4 | 2012 | Maiman and others v. Egypt |
Investment: Shareholding in EMG, a company that had concluded a 15 year contract with the Egyptian General Petroleum Corporation and the Egyptian Natural Gas Holdings to resell Egyptian natural gas. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged Government's failure to protect a gas pipeline in which the claimants had invested from attacks that took place during the Arab Spring. |
Pending | Egypt | Poland |
5 | 2007 | Europe Cement v. Turkey |
Investment: Minority shareholding in two Turkish utilities companies that had concluded electricity concession agreements with the Turkish Ministry of Energy. Summary: Claims arising out of the seizure of two Turkish utility companies, Cukarova Elektrik Anonim Sirketi and Kepez Elektrik Turk Anonim Sirketi, in respect of which the claimant held shares and the cancellation of electricity generation and distribution concession agreements between the latter two entities and Turkey. |
Decided in favour of State | Türkiye | Poland |
6 | 2006 | Cementownia v. Turkey (I) |
Investment: Shareholding in two Turkish hydroelectric companies, Cukurova Elektrik A.S. and Kepez Elektrik Türk A.S., that had concluded concession agreements with the Government for the generation, transmission, distribution and marketing of electricity. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged unilateral termination of certain concession agreements by the Turkish government, followed by the alleged seizure and expropriation of assets of the two hydroelectric plants in which the claimant had invested without compensation. |
Decided in favour of State | Türkiye | Poland |
7 | 2006 | Cementownia v. Turkey (II) |
Investment: Ownership of several assets and companies formerly owned by members of the Uzan family. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation by Turkey Savings Deposit Insurance Fund of several assets and companies formerly owned by members of the Uzan family, as part of Turkey's fraud case against such family and in an effort to satisfy creditors of an Uzan-owned financial institution, Imar Bank. |
Discontinued | Türkiye | Poland |
8 | 2002 | Pol Am Pack v. Romania |
Investment: Majority shareholding (90 per cent) in SC AMEP American Packaging SA Tecuci. Summary: |
Settled | Romania | Poland |