Belgium
Results: 3
Results: 20
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2023 | Libyan Investment Authority v. Belgium |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Belgium | Libya |
2 | 2017 | DP World v. Belgium |
Investment: Indirect shareholding of 60 per cent in the Antwerp Gateway facility, a container terminal at the Port of Antwerp, through a local subsidiary (DP World Antwerp N.V.). Summary: |
Pending | Belgium | United Arab Emirates |
3 | 2012 | Ping An v. Belgium |
Investment: Largest shareholding in the Belgian-Dutch financial institution Fortis. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's bailout, and subsequent nationalisation and sale to a third party, of the financial institution in which the claimants had invested, in the context of the 2008 financial crisis. |
Decided in favour of State | Belgium | China |
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2021 | SREW v. Ukraine |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Ukraine | Belgium |
2 | 2019 | Sapec v. Spain |
Investment: Investments in several photovoltaic power plants. Summary: Claims arising out of a series of energy reforms undertaken by the Government affecting the renewables sector. |
Pending | Spain | Belgium |
3 | 2018 | Cascade Investments v. Turkey |
Investment: Shareholding of 99.94% in Cihan Medya Dağitim (CMD), a local newspaper distribution company. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s measures in relation to the claimant’s newspaper distribution company, including charging the company’s general manager with terrorism and coup-plotting, seizing the company and placing it under State control. |
Decided in favour of State | Türkiye | Belgium |
4 | 2018 | Kimberly-Clark v. Venezuela |
Investment: Ownership of Kimberly-Clark Venezuela, S.C.A., a locally-incorporated company that operated a production plant of personal care products. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s seizure of the claimants’ factory, following the claimants’ decision to suspend business operations in Venezuela. |
Decided in favour of State | Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of |
Belgium Netherlands Spain |
5 | 2017 | De Sutter and others v. Madagascar (II) |
Investment: Ownership and operation of a textile factory by the local company Polo Garments Majunga, which is (directly and indirectly) owned by Peter and Kristof De Sutter. Summary: Claims arising out of the Attorney-General’s intervention in a local court case, which allegedly led to the halting of the enforcement of a claim against the Madagascan insurer Ny Havana. Polo Garments Majunga had commenced enforcement proceedings to collect an insurance payout from Ny Havana for a burned down textiles factory. |
Decided in favour of investor | Madagascar |
Luxembourg Belgium |
6 | 2014 | Blusun v. Italy |
Investment: Interests in a photovoltaic energy generation project in Italy. Summary: Claims arising out of Italy's modification to its solar power regime which reduced the level of feed-in-tariffs available in future, allegedly affecting claimants' investment in a photovoltaic energy generation project in that country. |
Decided in favour of State | Italy |
Belgium France Germany |
7 | 2014 | Interpétrol v. Burundi |
Investment: Rights under a government procurement contract concerning the supply of petroleum products. Summary: Claims arising out of legal proceedings initiated by the Government against Mr. Bashir and Interpétrol on charges of corruption, collusion and embezzlement in connection with a government procurement contract. |
Discontinued | Burundi | Belgium |
8 | 2014 | Zelena v. Serbia |
Investment: Operation of an animal-rendering facility in the town of Indjija, Serbia. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's alleged failure to enforce legislation on the handling of hazardous animal by-products equally among Zelena and its competitors, rendering the claimant's operation of an animal-rendering facility unviable. |
Decided in favour of investor | Serbia | Belgium |
9 | 2013 | De Sutter and others v. Madagascar (I) |
Investment: Ownership and operation of a textile factory by the local company Polo Garments Majunga, which is (directly and indirectly) owned by Peter and Kristof De Sutter. Summary: Claims arising out of the Attorney-General’s intervention in a local court case, which allegedly led to the halting of the enforcement of a claim against the Madagascan insurer Ny Havana. Polo Garments Majunga had commenced enforcement proceedings to collect an insurance payout from Ny Havana for a burned down textiles factory. |
Decided in favour of investor | Madagascar |
Belgium Luxembourg |
10 | 2013 | Houben v. Burundi |
Investment: Ownership of land, acquired by Mr. Houben for real estate development purposes. Summary: Claims arising out of an alleged de facto expropriation of land, by allowing the permanent occupation of claimant's property, without any form of compensation. |
Decided in favour of investor | Burundi | Belgium |
11 | 2013 | van Riet v. Croatia |
Investment: Ownership of 47 plots of land along the Zablacé peninsula, acquired for developing a 15-villa luxury beachside resort. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged misrepresentation by Croatian authorities to the claimants by issuing them certificates affirming that certain land plots were located within the allowed construction area for the development of a real estate project, and later refusing them permission to construct on the basis that the plots were outside the construction zone and noting that the previous certificates were issued in disregard of the applicable planning laws. |
Decided in favour of State | Croatia | Belgium |
12 | 2012 | Lone Star and others v. Korea |
Investment: Majority shareholding in a South Korean financial institution; shareholding in Seoul’s Star Tower; interests in an engineering and construction manufacturer. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged failure by Korean regulatory authorities over a period of several years to approve the purchase by third parties of claimant’s stake in Korea Exchange Bank, and the alleged imposition of arbitrary capital gains taxes on the sale by Korean tax authorities. |
Decided in favour of investor | Korea, Republic of |
Belgium Luxembourg |
13 | 2011 | Baggerwerken v. Philippines |
Investment: Rights under a dredging contract concluded with the Philippines' Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's unilateral termination of a contract entered into by the previous administration with the claimant for the rehabilitation of Laguna Lake to reduce flooding caused by heavy siltation and to improve the ecological condition of the area. |
Decided in favour of investor | Philippines | Belgium |
14 | 2007 | Electrabel v. Hungary |
Investment: Rights under a power purchase agreement concluded between Electrabel’s subsidiary Dunamenti Eromu (the owner-operator of a power plant near Budapest) and the State-owned electricity wholesaler MVM. Summary: Claims arising out of Hungary's termination of a power purchase agreement concluded with the investor, allegedly as part of the State's program for liberalizing its electricity market to comply with EU laws on State aid. |
Decided in favour of State | Hungary | Belgium |
15 | 2004 | Berschader v. Russia |
Investment: Sole shareholders in Belgian company that had a construction contract with Russia's Supreme Court. Summary: Claims arising out of late payments under a construction contract for the rehabilitation of the Russian Supreme Court building. |
Decided in favour of State | Russian Federation | Belgium |
16 | 2004 | Jan de Nul and and Dredging International v. Egypt |
Investment: Rights under a contract concluded with Egyptian authorities to undertake a dredging project; contributions of capital and other type of assets required to perform the dredging activities. Summary: Claims arising out of disagreements over additional compensation allegedly due to the investor under a contract it had entered into with the Egyptian agency in charge of the operation of the Suez Canal for the deepening and widening of certain southern stretches of the Canal. |
Decided in favour of State | Egypt | Belgium |
17 | 2001 | Goetz v. Burundi (II) |
Investment: Shareholding in mining, banking and service enterprises. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged retaliatory actions undertaken by the respondent against claimants' investments, following the enforcement of a previous arbitral award in claimants' favour. |
Decided in favour of investor | Burundi | Belgium |
18 | 1999 | Gruslin v. Malaysia (II) |
Investment: Portfolio investment in securities listed on the Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged losses in the value of claimant's investment arising from Malaysia's violation of the terms of an Intergovernmental Agreement concluded with the Belgo-Luxembourg Economic Union; particularly, that the imposition by the State of exchange controls allegedly constituted a breach of its obligations under said agreement. |
Decided in favour of State | Malaysia | Belgium |
19 | 1995 | Goetz v. Burundi (I) |
Investment: Ownership of local subsidiary involved in the production and marketing of precious metals. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's alleged withdrawal of a certificate of free zone conferring tax and customs exemptions. |
Settled | Burundi | Belgium |
20 | 1994 | Gruslin v. Malaysia (I) |
Investment: Summary: |
Settled | Malaysia | Belgium |