Moldova, Republic of

Moldova, Republic of

NO. Year of initiation Short case name Full case name Applicable IIA Arbitral rules Administering institution Summary Details of investment Outcome of original proceedings Respondent State Home State of investor Economic sector Economic subsector Arbitrators Amount claimed Amount awarded (or settled for) Breaches alleged Breaches found Decisions Individual opinions Follow-on proceeding type Follow-on proceeding status Follow-on decisions Follow-on individual opinions ICSID annulment committee members
1 2022 Rotalin v. Moldova RTI Rotalin Gas Trading AG and Rotalin Gaz Trading S.R.L. v. Republic of Moldova (ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/22/4) The Energy Charter Treaty (1994) ICSID AF ICSID Investment: Ownership (100%) of locally incorporated subsidiary, Rotalin Gaz Trading S.R.L., holding licences for the supply and distribution of natural gas.

Summary: Claims arising out of government agencies’ alleged measures to restrict the claimants’ access to the country’s natural gas network and the setting of unfair tariffs for the claimants’ natural gas distribution service.
Ownership (100%) of locally incorporated subsidiary, Rotalin Gaz Trading S.R.L., holding licences for the supply and distribution of natural gas. Pending Moldova, Republic of Liechtenstein Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply Scherer, M. - President

Hanefeld, I. - Claimant

Kalicki, J. E. - Respondent
62.00 mln USD Data not available Data not available Pending Data not available Data not available None None None None None
2 2020 Komaksavia v. Moldova Komaksavia Airport Invest Ltd v. Republic of Moldova Cyprus - Moldova, Republic of BIT (2007) SCC SCC Investment: Majority shareholding (95 per cent) in SC Avia Invest SRL, the concessionaire operating the Chisinau airport.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Public Property Agency’s notified termination of the concession contract with Avia Invest for alleged breaches of contract obligations by the concessionaire.
Majority shareholding (95 per cent) in SC Avia Invest SRL, the concessionaire operating the Chisinau airport. Decided in favour of State Moldova, Republic of Cyprus Tertiary: H - Transportation and storage 52 - Warehousing and support activities for transportation Kalicki, J. E. - President

Sands, P. - Claimant

Stern, B. - Respondent
900.00 mln EUR (1032.80 mln USD) Data not available Data not available None - jurisdiction declined Final Award dated 3 August 2022 None None None None None None
3 2016 Evrobalt and Kompozit v. Moldova Evrobalt LLC and Kompozit LLC v. Moldova Moldova, Republic of - Russian Federation BIT (1998) SCC SCC Investment: Shareholdings in Agroindbank, a Moldovan commercial bank.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Moldovan National Bank’s decision obliging the claimants to sell their shares in Agroindbank within a three-month period and ordering the cancellation of the shares after this period.
Shareholdings in Agroindbank, a Moldovan commercial bank. Decided in favour of State Moldova, Republic of Russian Federation Tertiary: K - Financial and insurance activities 64 - Financial service activities, except insurance and pension funding Andersson, F. - President

Pryles, M. C. - Claimant

von Schlabrendorff, F. - Respondent
Data not available Data not available Direct expropriation

Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims
Data not available Award dated 2017 None None None None None None
4 2016 Grot and others v. Moldova Zbigniew Piotr Grot, Grot Cimarron LLC, I.C.S. Laguardia SRL and Laguardia USA LLC v. Republic of Moldova (ICSID Case No. ARB/16/8) Moldova, Republic of - United States of America BIT (1993) ICSID ICSID 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.
Rights under lease agreements for agricultural land concluded with landowners for a 3-year period. Decided in favour of investor Moldova, Republic of United States of America

Poland
Primary: A - Agriculture, forestry and fishing 1 - Crop and animal production, hunting and related service activities Sands, P. - President

Fortier, L. Y. - Claimant

Knieper, R. - Respondent
15.00 mln USD 0.40 mln USD Indirect expropriation

Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures
Indirect expropriation Award dated 28 June 2018 None None None None None None
5 2014 TSIKinvest v. Moldova TSIKinvest LLC v. Republic of Moldova Moldova, Republic of - Russian Federation BIT (1998) SCC SCC Investment: Shareholding of 4.16 per cent in the capital of Victoriabank, a Moldovan bank.

Summary: Claims arising out of the suspension of claimant’s voting rights in a Moldovan bank and the forced sale of its shares within 3 months allegedly ordered by Moldova’s national bank.
Shareholding of 4.16 per cent in the capital of Victoriabank, a Moldovan bank. Discontinued Moldova, Republic of Russian Federation Tertiary: K - Financial and insurance activities 64 - Financial service activities, except insurance and pension funding Data not available Data not available Data not available Direct expropriation

Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims
Not applicable - settled or discontinued before decision on liability None None None None None None None
6 2012 Bogdanov v. Moldova (IV) Yuri Bogdanov and Yulia Bogdanova v. Republic of Moldova (SCC Case No. 091/2012) (IV) Moldova, Republic of - Russian Federation BIT (1998) SCC SCC Investment: Ownership of paint-manufacturing company.

Summary: Claims arising out of alleged tax and environmental policy modifications which adversely affected the claimant's operation of a local company involved in the production and sale of paints, varnishes and similar products in Moldova.
Ownership of paint-manufacturing company. Decided in favour of State Moldova, Republic of Russian Federation Secondary: C - Manufacturing 20 - Manufacture of chemicals and chemical products Sjovall, B. - Sole arbitrator 1.50 mln MDL (0.12 mln USD) Data not available Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures
None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Final Award dated 16 April 2013 None None None None None None
7 2012 State Enterprise v. Moldova State Enterprise Energorynok v. the Republic of Moldova (SCC Case No. 2012/175) The Energy Charter Treaty (1994) SCC SCC Investment: Creditor of a USD 1.7 million debt against a Moldovan State-owned entity for electricity supply.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's alleged responsibility for its judiciary in claimant's collection of a debt against a company owned by Moldova's Ministry of Energy concerning electricity supply; specifically, by the Moldovan courts' decision that the debt was to be paid to a third party.
Creditor of a USD 1.7 million debt against a Moldovan State-owned entity for electricity supply. Decided in favour of State Moldova, Republic of Ukraine Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply Turck, N. - President

Tirado, J. - Claimant

Knieper, R. - Respondent
1.80 mln USD Data not available Indirect expropriation

Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

Other
None - jurisdiction declined Final Award dated 29 January 2015 None None None None None None
8 2011 Arif v. Moldova Franck Charles Arif v. Republic of Moldova (ICSID Case No. ARB/11/23) France - Moldova, Republic of BIT (1997) ICSID ICSID Investment: Ownership of the Moldovan company Le Bridge, which had won a tender to set up and run a network of five duty free stores at the border with Romania; rights under related lease agreements; construction of four duty free stores; related authorizations and licenses.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged Government interference in the investor's duty-free business at Chisinau Airport and at five border stores with Romania which delayed or prevented the opening of such duty free stores.
Ownership of the Moldovan company Le Bridge, which had won a tender to set up and run a network of five duty free stores at the border with Romania; rights under related lease agreements; construction of four duty free stores; related authorizations and licenses. Decided in favour of investor Moldova, Republic of France Tertiary: G - Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles 47 - Retail trade, except of motor vehicles and motorcycles Cremades, B. M. - President

Hanotiau, B. - Claimant

Knieper, R. - Respondent
27.90 mln EUR (36.30 mln USD) 35.10 mln MDL (2.70 mln USD)
Non-pecuniary relief
Indirect expropriation

Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

Full protection and security, or similar

Umbrella clause

National treatment

Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures
Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims Award dated 8 April 2013 None None None None None None
9 2010 Energoalians v. Moldova Energoalians SARL v. the Republic of Moldova The Energy Charter Treaty (1994) UNCITRAL None Investment: Shareholding in an electricity production company.

Summary: Claims arising out of the non-payment of accumulated debt by the State-owned entity Moldtranselectro and by another former partner of Energoalians, for energy supplied in 1999-2000.
Shareholding in an electricity production company. Decided in favour of investor Moldova, Republic of Ukraine Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply Pellew, D. - President

Savransky, M. Y. - Claimant

Volcinski, V. - Respondent
49.00 mln USD 195.50 mln MDL (14.90 mln USD) Indirect expropriation

Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures

Other
Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims Award dated 25 October 2013 Dissenting Opinion on Jurisdiction of Dominic Pellew (Award) Judicial review by national courts Pending (Judicial review by national courts) Judgment of the Paris Court of Appeal dated 12 April 2016 (Judicial review by national courts)

Judgment of the French Court of Cassation dated 28 March 2018 (Judicial review by national courts)

Judgment of Paris Court of Appeal dated 24 September 2019 (Judicial review by national courts)
None None
10 2009 Bogdanov v. Moldova (III) Yury Bogdanov v. Republic of Moldova (III) (SCC Case No. 114/2009) Moldova, Republic of - Russian Federation BIT (1998) SCC SCC Investment: Ownership of the chemicals import company "Grand Torg", domiciled in the Free Enterprise Zone Expo-Business-Chisinau.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged wrongdoing on the part of Moldova's Customs Department, after it supposedly restricted the operations of claimant's company in a so-called free economic zone by unilaterally collecting from claimant's investment a fee for each customs declaration which was considered by the investor as a more onerous customs regime than that existing at its time of registration.
Ownership of the chemicals import company "Grand Torg", domiciled in the Free Enterprise Zone Expo-Business-Chisinau. Decided in favour of investor Moldova, Republic of Russian Federation Secondary: C - Manufacturing 20 - Manufacture of chemicals and chemical products Nilsson, B. G. H. - Sole arbitrator 0.52 mln MDL (0.04 mln USD) 0.47 mln MDL (0.03 mln USD) Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

Full protection and security, or similar

Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures
Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

Full protection and security, or similar

Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures
Final Award dated 30 March 2010 None None None None None None
11 2005 Bogdanov v. Moldova (II) Iurii Bogdanov, Agurdino-Invest Ltd. and Agurdino-Chimia JSC v. Republic of Moldova (II) Moldova, Republic of - Russian Federation BIT (1998) SCC SCC Investment: Ownership of a paint-manufacturing company.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged wrongdoing on the part of Moldova's Customs Department, after it supposedly restricted the operations of claimant's paint-manufacturing company in a so-called free economic zone.
Ownership of a paint-manufacturing company. Decided in favour of State Moldova, Republic of Russian Federation Secondary: C - Manufacturing 20 - Manufacture of chemicals and chemical products Data not available Data not available Data not available Data not available None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Award dated 31 January 2006 None Data not available Data not available Data not available Data not available Data not available
12 2004 Bogdanov v. Moldova (I) Iurii Bogdanov, Agurdino-Invest Ltd and Agurdino-Chimia JSC v. Republic of Moldova (I) Moldova, Republic of - Russian Federation BIT (1998) SCC SCC Investment: Ownership of local investment company that had a privatization contract with Moldovan authorities for the purchase of a majority shareholding in the capital of certain privatized company.

Summary: Claims arising out of the Moldovan Department of Privatization's refusal to fully compensate the value of the investors' assets that were transferred to the State in accordance with certain privatization contract.
Ownership of local investment company that had a privatization contract with Moldovan authorities for the purchase of a majority shareholding in the capital of certain privatized company. Decided in favour of investor Moldova, Republic of Russian Federation Tertiary: M - Professional, scientific and technical activities 74 - Other professional, scientific and technical activities Cordero-Moss, G. - Sole arbitrator 0.62 mln MDL (0.04 mln USD) 0.69 mln MDL (0.05 mln USD) Indirect expropriation

Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

Full protection and security, or similar
Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims Award dated 22 September 2005 None None None None None None
13 1999 Link Trading v. Moldova Link-Trading Joint Stock Company v. Department for Customs Control of the Republic of Moldova Moldova, Republic of - United States of America BIT (1993) UNCITRAL None Investment: U.S.-Moldovan joint venture company engaged in the import of consumer products into the Free Economic Zone of Chisinau and resale to retail customers.

Summary: Claims arising out of changes in the rates of duties and VAT exemptions introduced by the 1998 Moldovan Law on the Budget which allegedly destroyed the economic viability of claimant's business.
U.S.-Moldovan joint venture company engaged in the import of consumer products into the Free Economic Zone of Chisinau and resale to retail customers. Decided in favour of State Moldova, Republic of United States of America Tertiary: G - Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles 47 - Retail trade, except of motor vehicles and motorcycles Hertzfeld, J. M. - President

Buruiana, I. V. - Claimant

Zykin, I. S. - Respondent
3.50 mln USD Data not available Indirect expropriation None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage Award on Jurisdiction dated 16 February 2001

Final Award dated 18 April 2002
None None None None None None
NO. Year of initiation Short case name Full case name Applicable IIA Arbitral rules Administering institution Summary Details of investment Outcome of original proceedings Respondent State Home State of investor Economic sector Economic subsector Arbitrators Amount claimed Amount awarded (or settled for) Breaches alleged Breaches found Decisions Individual opinions Follow-on proceeding type Follow-on proceeding status Follow-on decisions Follow-on individual opinions ICSID annulment committee members
1 2010 Stati and others v. Kazakhstan Ascom Group S.A., Anatolie Stati, Gabriel Stati and Terra Raf Trans Traiding Ltd. v. Republic of Kazakhstan (SCC Case No. 116/2010) The Energy Charter Treaty (1994) SCC SCC Investment: Rights under certain subsoil use contracts held by Ascom's local operating companies, KPM and TNG; capital contributions for oil exploration and development; assets and infrastructure related to oil field operations, including a Liquid Petroleum Gas plant.

Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged campaign of harassment by the Kazakh State which culminated with the abrupt cancellation of oil and gas exploration contracts held by claimant's local operating companies, followed by the seizure of its Kazakh assets.
Rights under certain subsoil use contracts held by Ascom's local operating companies, KPM and TNG; capital contributions for oil exploration and development; assets and infrastructure related to oil field operations, including a Liquid Petroleum Gas plant. Decided in favour of investor Kazakhstan Moldova, Republic of

Romania

Gibraltar
Primary: B - Mining and quarrying 6 - Extraction of crude petroleum and natural gas Böckstiegel, K.-H. - President

Haigh, D. - Claimant

Lebedev, S. N. - Respondent
2631.00 mln USD 497.00 mln USD Direct expropriation

Indirect expropriation

Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims

Full protection and security, or similar

Umbrella clause

Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures

Other
Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims Award dated 19 December 2013 None Judicial review by national courts Award/decision upheld (Judicial review by national courts) Judgment of the Svea Court of Appeal dated 9 December 2016 (English) (Judicial review by national courts)

Judgment of the Svea Court of Appeal dated 9 December 2016 (Swedish) (Judicial review by national courts)

Decision of Svea Court of Appeal dated 9 March 2020 (Swedish) (Judicial review by national courts)

Decision of Svea Court of Appeal 9 March 2020 (Unofficial English Translation) dated 9 March 2020 (Judicial review by national courts)
Dissenting Opinion by Magnus Ulriksson (English) (Judgment of the Svea Court of Appeal dated 9 December 2016 (English))

Dissenting Opinion by Magnus Ulriksson (Swedish) (Judgment of the Svea Court of Appeal dated 9 December 2016 (Swedish))
None