Slovakia
Results: 14
Results: 1
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2021 | Discovery Global v. Slovakia |
Investment: Ownership of local subsidiary Alpine Oil & Gas s.r.o., holding oil and gas exploration rights for activities at the Smilno, Ruská Poruba and Krivá Oľka wells in north-eastern Slovakia. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged actions preventing drilling activities of the claimant’s subsidiary, Alpine Oil & Gas, at three oil and gas wells despite granted exploration licences. According to the claimant, its planned drilling operations were rendered impossible by local activists’ protests blocking the well sites as well as local authorities’ decisions ordering full-scope environmental impact assessments. |
Pending | Slovakia | United States of America |
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 | EuroGas and Belmont v. Slovakia |
Investment: Majority shareholding (90 per cent) in Rozmina, a Slovakian company that held an exclusive right to carry out talc mining activities in Slovakia. Summary: Claims arising out of the revocation of claimants' exclusive rights for mining activities at the Gemerska Poloma talc deposit allegedly without compensation, despite three decisions of Slovakia's Supreme Court declaring such action illegal. |
Decided in favour of State | Slovakia |
Canada United States of America |
4 | 2013 | Achmea v. Slovakia (II) |
Investment: Shareholding in a Slovak health insurer, Union zdravotna poistovna (UZP). Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's announced plan to establish a unitary public health insurance system in Slovakia run by the State, which would allegedly entail the expropriation of Achmea’s stake in a Slovak health insurance company. |
Decided in favour of State | Slovakia | Netherlands |
5 | 2013 | U.S. Steel v. Slovakia |
Investment: Ownership of a local steel production company. Summary: Claims arising out of the imposition of certain electricity tariffs upon claimant's local steel plant, US Steel Košice. |
Discontinued | Slovakia | Netherlands |
6 | 2012 | Slovak Gas v. Slovakia |
Investment: Shareholding of 49 per cent in the Slovakian natural gas supplier Slovenský plynárenský priemysel (SPP). Summary: Claims arising out of legislative amendments affecting Slovakian price regulation in the gas sector that were allegedly in contravention of certain shareholder's agreement concluded between the claimants and Slovakia, among other actions allegedly resulting in financial losses for claimants' investment in a Slovakian gas company. |
Settled | Slovakia |
France Germany Netherlands |
7 | 2009 | EURAM Bank v. Slovakia |
Investment: Acquisition, through EURAM's Slovak subsidiary E.I.C., a.s., of a 51 per cent stake in the health insurance company APOLLO zdravotná poisťovňa, a.s. Summary: Claims arising out of various legislative measures introduced by Slovakia that allegedly constituted a systematic reversal of the previous liberalisation of the Slovak health insurance market that had prompted the claimant to invest in the Slovak Republic’s health insurance sector. |
Decided in favour of State | Slovakia | Austria |
8 | 2008 | Achmea v. Slovakia (I) |
Investment: Ownership of company that had obtained a share of around 8.5 per cent in the Slovak health insurance market (wholly owned subsidiary). Summary: Claims arising out of various legislative measures introduced by Slovakia that allegedly constituted a systematic reversal of the previous liberalisation of the Slovak health insurance market that had prompted the claimant to invest in the Slovak Republic’s health insurance sector. |
Decided in favour of investor | Slovakia | Netherlands |
9 | 2008 | Alps Finance v. Slovakia |
Investment: Acquisition of certain receivables from a private Slovak company, i.e. sums payable to the assignor by a debtor who at the time of the assignment of the receivables had been declared bankrupt. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged actions by the Slovak judiciary, particularly the Regional Court of Bratislava, preventing the claimant to enforce certain credits it had acquired towards a Slovak debtor. |
Decided in favour of State | Slovakia | Switzerland |
10 | 2008 | Austrian Airlines v. Slovakia |
Investment: Majority shareholding in a Slovakian airline. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged Government's liability for debts of a Slovakian airline in which the claimant had invested and that ceased to operate amidst financial problems. |
Decided in favour of State | Slovakia | Austria |
11 | 2008 | HICEE v. Slovakia |
Investment: Shareholding in two Slovakian health insurance companies, which were subsidiaries of another Slovakian entity in turn wholly owned by the claimant. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's adoption of a number of changes and amendments to the laws on health insurance since 2007, including an Act by which health insurance companies were prohibited from distributing profits and made subject to a cap on their permissible administrative expenses. |
Decided in favour of State | Slovakia | Netherlands |
12 | 2006 | Mensik v. Slovakia |
Investment: Data not available Summary: Claims arising out of respondent's alleged mistreatment concerning a mineral water spring project in which the claimant had invested. |
Discontinued | Slovakia | Switzerland |
13 | 2006 | Oostergetel v. Slovakia |
Investment: Majority shareholding in a yarn and thread manufacturing enterprise, Bratislavská cvernová továreň (BCT) that had been privatised by the Government. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged actions and omissions by the Slovak authorities that resulted in BCT's bankruptcy, including actions taken by a Bratislava court and the local tax office. |
Decided in favour of State | Slovakia | Netherlands |
14 | 1997 | CSOB. v. Slovakia |
Investment: Rights under certain consolidation agreement concluded among the Czech Republic, Slovakia and ČSOB concerning the claimant's financial restructuring. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged breach of a financial consolidation agreement concluded among the Czech Republic, the Slovak Republic and ČSOB in relation to the bank’s financial restructuring in advance of its then planned privatization |
Decided in favour of investor | Slovakia | Czechia |
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2013 | Poštová banka and Istrokapital v. Greece |
Investment: Ownership by Poštová banka of Greek Government bonds, characterized by claimants as a loan to the Greek Government, a claim to money, and a right to performance under a contract having financial value. Summary: Claims arising out of the enactment of legislation that amended sovereign bond terms retroactively and unilaterally by the Government, allegedly allowing the imposition of new terms upon bondholders against their consent if a supermajority of other bondholders consented, in the context of Greece's 2012 sovereign debt restructuring. |
Decided in favour of State | Greece |
Cyprus Slovakia |