Ukraine
Results: 31
Results: 17
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2022 | Ostchem v. Ukraine |
Investment: Rights under a natural gas purchase and sale contract with a state-owned company. Summary: |
Pending | Ukraine | Cyprus |
2 | 2021 | Misen v. Ukraine |
Investment: Rights to produce hydrocarbons under a joint activity agreement between Misen Enterprises AB and the local subsidiary LLC Karpatygaz (together 50.01%) concluded with JSC Ukrgasvydobuvannya (49.99%), a subsidiary of the NJSC Naftogaz of Ukraine. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s imposition of a 70% subsoil use charge for the production of natural gas from depths of up to 5,000 meters, applying to enterprises established under joint activity agreements. According to the claimants, this led to the termination of the joint activity agreement for gas production in which the claimants and a local subsidiary held the majority interest. |
Pending | Ukraine | Sweden |
3 | 2021 | Modus Energy v. Ukraine |
Investment: Ownership of three solar parks (Bolokhivsky Solar Park 1 LLC, Bolokhivsky Solar Park 2, Solar Zalukva LLC). Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s reduction of feed-in tariffs for solar power. |
Pending | Ukraine | Netherlands |
4 | 2021 | Philip Morris and others v. Ukraine |
Investment: Summary: |
Discontinued | Ukraine |
Switzerland United States of America |
5 | 2021 | SREW v. Ukraine |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Ukraine | Belgium |
6 | 2020 | Wang and others v. Ukraine |
Investment: Shareholding in PJSC Motor Sich, a manufacturer of aircraft engines. Summary: Claims arising out of the State authorities’ alleged actions to freeze the claimants’ acquisition of shares in aerospace company Motor Sich. |
Pending | Ukraine | China |
7 | 2019 | VEB v. Ukraine |
Investment: 99.8% shareholding in Prominvestbank, a Ukrainian commercial bank. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged confiscation of shares held by the claimant, a state-owned Russian company, in its Ukrainian subsidiary Prominvestbank and the ban of the subsidiary’s business operations with the parent company. |
Pending | Ukraine | Russian Federation |
8 | 2018 | Gazprom v. Ukraine |
Investment: Shareholdings in JSC Gaztranzit, PJSC Yuzhniigiprogaz Institute, LLC Gazprom sbyt Ukraine, and LLC International Consortium for the Ukrainian Gas Transmission System Management and Development. Summary: Claims arising out of a multi-billion dollar fine imposed on the claimant by Ukraine’s Antimonopoly Committee in 2016 for violation of competition laws. Allegedly, subsequent enforcement actions included the forced sale of the claimant’s shares in a company. |
Settled | Ukraine | Russian Federation |
9 | 2018 | Olympic Entertainment v. Ukraine |
Investment: Ownership (100% interest) of Olympic Casino Ukraine TOV, a local subsidiary operating casinos in Ukraine, and three related companies (Alea Private Company, Ukraine Leisure Company and Eldorado Leisure Company). Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s ban on gambling in 2009, which revoked operators’ licenses for gambling activities and resulted in the bankruptcy of the claimant’s local subsidiaries. |
Decided in favour of investor | Ukraine | Estonia |
10 | 2017 | Boyko v. Ukraine |
Investment: Investments in Zhytomyrski Lasoschi, a chocolate factory in northwestern Ukraine. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged takeover and seizure of the claimant’s chocolate factory. |
Pending | Ukraine | Russian Federation |
11 | 2016 | Emergofin and Velbay v. Ukraine |
Investment: 68.01% shareholding in Zaporozhe Aluminium Plant (“Zalk“). Summary: Claims arising out of the Ukrainian Supreme Court’s decision (2015) to expropriate the claimants’ majority stake in the aluminium production company Zalk. |
Pending | Ukraine | Netherlands |
12 | 2016 | Tatarstan v. Ukraine |
Investment: 28.78% shareholding in the Ukrainian company PJSC “Ukrtatnafta” (owner of the Kremenchug oil refinery in the Poltava region). Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged taking of the claimant’s shares in the Ukrainian oil refinery “Ukrtatnafta” as a result of several allegedly illegal decisions of the Ukrainian courts rendered in 2007 and thereafter. |
Pending | Ukraine | Russian Federation |
13 | 2015 | Gilward Investments v. Ukraine |
Investment: Majority shareholding (38 per cent) in AeroSvit, a Ukrainian partly State-owned airline company. Summary: Claims arising out of the measures taken by the Government related to the bankruptcy of the claimant’s Ukrainian subsidiary, AeroSvit. |
Pending | Ukraine | Netherlands |
14 | 2015 | JKX Oil & Gas and Poltava v. Ukraine |
Investment: Investments in oil and gas production plants in Ukraine. Summary: Claims arising from a series of alleged discriminatory State measures including legislation adopted in July 2014 that temporarily raised royalties on gas production from 28 to 55 per cent as well as regulations introduced in November 2014 that required private companies to purchase gas solely from state entity Naftogaz, and placed restrictions on other sellers. |
Decided in favour of investor | Ukraine |
United Kingdom Netherlands |
15 | 2015 | Littop and others v. Ukraine |
Investment: Minority shareholding in PJSC Ukrnafta, an oil and gas company. Summary: Claims arising out of government’s measures with respect to PJSC Ukrnafta’s operations, including alleged interference with the sales price of natural gas. |
Decided in favour of State | Ukraine | Cyprus |
16 | 2014 | City-State v. Ukraine |
Investment: Majority shareholding in the financial institution PJSC KreditPromBank. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged failure by Ukraine's banking authority to exercise regulatory oversight over claimants' deposits in the bank KreditPromBank after it was sold to a Ukrainian national, including the alleged transfer of the bank's assets and accounts to offshore companies in violation of Ukrainian banking regulation, and alleged government interference in domestic judicial proceedings. |
Decided in favour of investor | Ukraine | Netherlands |
17 | 2014 | Krederi v. Ukraine |
Investment: Rights under contracts for the development of a hotel, shopping center and apartment complex within a property acquired by Krederi. Summary: Claims arising out of a series of Ukrainian judicial rulings that annulled contracts held by claimant's subsidiary companies for the acquisition and commercial development of property. |
Decided in favour of State | Ukraine | United Kingdom |
18 | 2009 | Global Trading v. Ukraine |
Investment: Rights under poultry sales and purchase contracts concluded between the claimants and senior Ukrainian officials; particularly, the right to be paid for performance of contractual obligations. Summary: Claims arising out of Ukraine's alleged failure to pay for and take delivery of poultry shipped to the designated port under certain poultry sales contracts concluded with the claimants, and the alleged resulting losses incurred by the claimants before they could dispose of the goods. |
Decided in favour of State | Ukraine | United States of America |
19 | 2008 | Bosh v. Ukraine |
Investment: Rights under a contract concluded between B&P and the Taras Shevchenko National University of Kiev to undertake a two-stage renovation and redevelopment of a property. Summary: Claims arising out of the termination of a contract entered into between the investors and a Ukranian university for the development of a facility comprising a hotel, sports facilities, conference rooms and a research training centre, through conduct of Ukrainian courts, the Ministry of Justice, and the Education Control Division of the General Control and Revision Office of Ukraine. |
Decided in favour of State | Ukraine | United States of America |
20 | 2008 | GEA v. Ukraine |
Investment: Capital loans to OJSC Oriana, a former Ukrainian State-owned petrochemicals plant. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged misappropriation of diesel and raw materials by a State-owned petrochemical company which were supplied by the investor, and the investor's subsequent failure to collect an ICC award in its favour against such company in Ukrainian courts. |
Decided in favour of State | Ukraine | Germany |
21 | 2008 | Inmaris Perestroika v. Ukraine |
Investment: Claims to performance under direct and derivative rights under certain bareboat charter contract and related agreements concluded between the claimants and a State-owned entity. Summary: Claims arising out of a series of contracts concluded between a State-owned education institution of Ukraine and the claimants concerning the use of a windjammer sail training ship and subsequent disagreements regarding the operation of the contracts, including financing options for the reconstruction of the ship, followed by a Government's decision prohibiting the ship to leave Ukrainian territorial waters until clarification of matters relating to its joint operation. |
Decided in favour of investor | Ukraine | Germany |
22 | 2008 | Remington v. Ukraine |
Investment: Rights under a contract for supply of power equipment; Russian judgment in claimant's favour. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged non-enforcement in the territory of Ukraine of a judgment rendered by the Commercial Court of Saint Petersburg and the Leningrad Region in favour of Remington regarding unpaid debts owed under a sales contract by the Ukrainian state enterprise National Nuclear Energy Generating Company “Energoatom”. |
Decided in favour of investor | Ukraine | Gibraltar |
23 | 2008 | Tatneft v. Ukraine |
Investment: Shareholding in the Ukrainian company Ukrtatnafta. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's taking of claimant's shares in the Ukrainian oil refinery “Ukrtatnafta” followed by the physical takeover of such company. |
Decided in favour of investor | Ukraine | Russian Federation |
24 | 2007 | Alpha Projektholding v. Ukraine |
Investment: Contributions made in connection with joint investment activities agreements concluded between the parties concerning a project to renovate and operate a hotel in Kiev, giving rise to certain legal rights and interests. Summary: Claims arising out of the investor's modernization of a four star hotel complex in Kiev followed by Ukraine's alleged expropriation of the hotel by turning it into a public corporation and transferring its assets, co-owned by the respondent, to a company solely owned by Ukraine without compensation. |
Decided in favour of investor | Ukraine | Austria |
25 | 2007 | Laskaridis Shipping v. Ukraine |
Investment: Rights under a shipyard and boatbuilding contract. Summary: Claims arising out of the investors' purchase of a series of vessels from a now-insolvent Ukrainian shipyard and alleged expropriatory acts by the Government in relation to such purchases. |
Settled | Ukraine | Greece |
26 | 2006 | Lemire v. Ukraine (II) |
Investment: Indirect majority shareholding in a Ukrainian joint stock company licensed to broadcast on various radio frequencies in Ukraine. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged breach of a settlement agreement concluded with the respondent concerning claimant's investment, and regarding the Ukraine regulators' handling of broadcasting licensing and trademark applications. |
Decided in favour of investor | Ukraine | United States of America |
27 | 2005 | Amto v. Ukraine |
Investment: Majority shareholding in Ukrainian company that had concluded several maintenance contracts with the State-owned nuclear energy company Energoatom for the repair of high-voltage electrical equipment. Summary: Claims arising out of the bankruptcy of the Zaporozhskaya nuclear power plant in eastern Ukraine and its default under contracts to claimant's subsidiary for maintenance works carried out at such plant; particularly, the alleged prevention by Ukrainian bankruptcy law and the conduct of these bankruptcy proceedings from enforcing several court orders obtained by claimant's subsidiary against the State-owned company. |
Decided in favour of State | Ukraine | Latvia |
28 | 2004 | Western NIS v. Ukraine |
Investment: Direct creditor of a commercial award rendered against the investor's Ukrainian partner in a joint venture to produce sunflower oil. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged refusal of Ukrainian courts to enforce an American Arbitration Association commercial award in favour of the claimant. |
Settled | Ukraine | United States of America |
29 | 2002 | Tokios Tokelés v. Ukraine |
Investment: Ownership of local publishing company. Summary: Claims arising out of certain alleged retaliatory actions by the respondent for a publication concerning an Ukrainian opposition politician, including document seizures, public accusations of illegal conduct, judicial actions to invalidate contracts and seizure of assets. |
Decided in favour of State | Ukraine | Lithuania |
30 | 2000 | Generation Ukraine v. Ukraine |
Investment: Ownership of local investment company engaged in carrying out a construction project of an office building. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged obstruction and interference by local authorities with the realization of the investor's construction project. |
Decided in favour of State | Ukraine | United States of America |
31 | 1998 | Lemire v. Ukraine (I) |
Investment: Indirect majority shareholding in Ukrainian joint stock company licensed to broadcast on various radio frequencies in Ukraine. Summary: Claims arising out of claimant's difficulties in obtaining licenses for radio frequencies and broadcasting channels in Ukraine. |
Settled | Ukraine | United States of America |
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2023 | SCM v. Russia |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Russian Federation | Ukraine |
2 | 2021 | Optima v. United States (I) |
Investment: Ownership of a commercial real estate property known as the “CompuCom Campus” in Dallas, Texas, and a property known as 55 Public Square in Cleveland, Ohio. Summary: Claims arising out of civil forfeiture proceedings commenced by the U.S. Department of Justice against the claimants’ commercial real estate properties in Dallas and Cleveland, in connection with the alleged violation of U.S. money laundering laws. |
Pending | United States of America | Ukraine |
3 | 2021 | Optima v. United States (II) |
Investment: Ownership of a commercial real estate property known as 55 Public Square in Cleveland, Ohio. Summary: Claims arising out of civil forfeiture proceedings commenced by the U.S. Department of Justice against the claimants’ commercial real estate in Cleveland, in connection with the alleged violation of U.S. money laundering laws. |
Discontinued | United States of America | Ukraine |
4 | 2019 | Skubenko and others v. North Macedonia |
Investment: Shareholding in locally-incorporated mining company Copper Investments JSC and subsidiary company Sardich MC, holding three mining concessions for the Kazandol, Petroshnitsa and Plavush deposits. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s termination in March 2018 of the claimants’ concession for the exploitation of copper, gold and silver at the Kazandol deposit in southern Macedonia, allegedly related to environmental concerns. |
Pending | North Macedonia | Ukraine |
5 | 2019 | Ukrenergo v. Russia |
Investment: Investments in 17 substations of the Crimea electric power system. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation by the Russian Federation of the claimant’s electricity infrastructure facilities and transmission lines in Crimea. |
Pending | Russian Federation | Ukraine |
6 | 2018 | DTEK v. Russia |
Investment: Ownership of electric power distribution assets in Crimea. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation of the claimant’s electricity distribution business in the Crimea region by the Russian Federation. |
Decided in favour of investor | Russian Federation | Ukraine |
7 | 2017 | Kazmin v. Latvia |
Investment: Investment in KVV Liepājas Metalurgs, a steel plant on Latvia’s west coast. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged misconduct concerning the tender process for a steel plant, which was acquired by the Ukrainian KVV Group, a company co-owned by the claimant, and subsequent actions that allegedly rendered the plant unprofitable and caused its insolvency in 2016. |
Discontinued | Latvia | Ukraine |
8 | 2016 | Naftogaz and others v. Russia |
Investment: Oil and gas assets. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation of the claimants’ oil and gas assets in Crimea by the Russian Federation and the transfer of assets to a Russian state-owned company. |
Decided in favour of investor | Russian Federation | Ukraine |
9 | 2016 | Oschadbank v. Russia |
Investment: Ownership of a bank branch in Crimea. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged seizure of a branch of Oschadbank in Crimea following the annexation of this territory by the Russian Federation in 2014. |
Decided in favour of investor | Russian Federation | Ukraine |
10 | 2015 | Aeroport Belbek and Kolomoisky v. Russia |
Investment: Rights under an operations contract concerning the commercial passenger terminal at the Belbek Airport near Sevastopol including investments in various upgrades and renovations. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation of the commercial passenger terminal operated by the claimant at the Belbek Airport near Sevastopol following the annexation of Crimea by Russia. |
Pending | Russian Federation | Ukraine |
11 | 2015 | Everest and others v. Russia |
Investment: Ownership of a large number of properties in Crimea, including offices, apartment buildings, and villas. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation of properties following the 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea. |
Decided in favour of investor | Russian Federation | Ukraine |
12 | 2015 | Lugzor and others v. Russia |
Investment: Investments in real estate located in the Crimean Peninsula. Summary: Claims arising out of the Russian Federation's alleged interference with and expropriation of the claimants' real estate investments in Crimea. |
Decided in favour of investor | Russian Federation | Ukraine |
13 | 2015 | Privatbank and Finilon v. Russia |
Investment: Investment of alleged USD 1 billion into the banking operations in Crimea encompassing loans, real estate and a vast automated teller machine (ATM) network. Summary: Claims arising from the alleged expropriation of the claimants' investments in Crimea as well as its subsidiary Moskomprivatbankin following the 2014 Russian annexation of that territory including alleged confiscation of various cash holdings and real estate assets owned by the claimants, totaling nearly $200 million. |
Pending | Russian Federation | Ukraine |
14 | 2015 | Stabil and others v. Russia |
Investment: Ownership of 31 petrol stations in Crimea. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation of petrol stations in Crimea following the 2014 Russian annexation of that territory. |
Decided in favour of investor | Russian Federation | Ukraine |
15 | 2015 | Ukrnafta v. Russia |
Investment: Ownership of 16 petrol stations in the region of Crimea. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation of petrol stations in Crimea following the 2014 Russian annexation of that territory. |
Decided in favour of investor | Russian Federation | Ukraine |
16 | 2012 | State Enterprise v. Moldova |
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. |
Decided in favour of State | Moldova, Republic of | Ukraine |
17 | 2010 | Energoalians v. Moldova |
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. |
Decided in favour of investor | Moldova, Republic of | Ukraine |