United States of America
Results: 24
Results: 232
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2023 | APMC v. United States |
Investment: Investment in the Keystone XL Pipeline project. Summary: Claims arising out of the incoming president’s executive order in 2021 revoking a 2019 presidential permit to construct the Keystone XL Pipeline, a proposed crude oil pipeline from Alberta (Canada) to Nebraska (United States). |
Pending | United States of America | Canada |
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 | 2021 | TC Energy and TransCanada v. USA (II) |
Investment: Interests in the Keystone XL Pipeline project; ownership and/or control of thirteen U.S. enterprises, including TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, L.P. (“Keystone”), and other assets. Summary: Claims arising out of the incoming president’s executive order in 2021 revoking a 2019 presidential permit to construct the Keystone XL Pipeline, a proposed crude oil pipeline from Alberta (Canada) to Nebraska (United States). |
Pending | United States of America | Canada |
5 | 2016 | TransCanada v. USA (I) |
Investment: Interests in the Keystone XL Pipeline project; ownership and/or control of nine U.S. enterprises, including TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, L.P. (“Keystone”), and other assets. Summary: Claims arising out of the denial of the application for a Presidential Permit to construct the Keystone XL Pipeline, a proposed 1,897 km crude oil pipeline from Alberta (Canada) to Nebraska (United States), and the Government’s actions leading to that denial. |
Settled | United States of America | Canada |
6 | 2013 | Costa Rican and Dominican Victims v. United States |
Investment: Investments in and through the Stanford Financial group of companies based in Texas, including certificates of deposit issued by Antiguan-based Stanford International Bank. Summary: Claims arising out of Government regulators’ alleged failure to protect claimants’ investment by neglecting to stop the Stanford Ponzi scheme in a timely manner. |
Pending | United States of America |
Costa Rica Dominican Republic |
7 | 2013 | Nationals of Peru v. United States |
Investment: Investments in and through the Stanford Financial group of companies based in Texas, including certificates of deposit issued by Antiguan-based Stanford International Bank. Summary: Claims arising out of Government regulators’ alleged failure to protect claimants’ investment by neglecting to stop the Stanford Ponzi scheme in a timely manner. |
Pending | United States of America | Peru |
8 | 2013 | North American Investors v. United States |
Investment: Investments in and through the Stanford Financial group of companies based in Texas, including certificates of deposit issued by Antiguan-based Stanford International Bank. Summary: Claims arising out of Government regulators’ alleged failure to protect claimants’ investment by neglecting to stop the Stanford Ponzi scheme in a timely manner. |
Pending | United States of America |
Mexico Canada |
9 | 2012 | Apotex v. USA (III) |
Investment: Indirect ownership and control of an American-based Apotex affiliate engaged in the distribution of generic drugs. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged injuries from "Import Alerts" issued by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration concerning two of Apotex’s Canadian manufacturing facilities. |
Decided in favour of State | United States of America | Canada |
10 | 2009 | Apotex v. USA (II) |
Investment: Canadian pharmaceuticals corporation engaged in developing and manufacturing generic drugs. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged errors committed by U.S. agencies and federal courts in interpreting federal law, in the course of the investor's efforts to bring new generic drugs to market in the United States. |
Decided in favour of State | United States of America | Canada |
11 | 2009 | CANACAR v. USA |
Investment: Trucking services provided by claimant, a trade association representing individual carriers within the Mexican trucking industry. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged restrictions imposed by the U.S. Department of Transportation upon Mexican carrier operations in the United States and Mexican investments in U.S. carriers, as well as the United States' failure to comply with a 2001 NAFTA Chapter 20 arbitral decision, "In the Matter of Cross-Border Trucking Services". |
Discontinued | United States of America | Mexico |
12 | 2008 | Apotex v.USA (I) |
Investment: Canadian pharmaceuticals corporation engaged in developing and manufacturing generic drugs. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged errors committed by U.S. agencies and federal courts in interpreting federal law, in the course of the investor's efforts to bring new generic drugs to market in the United States. |
Decided in favour of State | United States of America | Canada |
13 | 2007 | Domtar v. USA |
Investment: Ownership of Domtar Enterprises Inc. and Domtar Industries Inc., locally-incorporated companies marketing and selling softwood lumber products in the United States. Summary: Claims arising out of certain U.S. antidumping and countervailing duty investigations with respect to softwood lumber products imported from Canada into the United States, as well as the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000, and the 2006 Softwood Lumber Agreement between the United States and Canada. |
Discontinued | United States of America | Canada |
14 | 2005 | Canadian Cattlemen v. USA |
Investment: Beef and cattle-related operations including cow-calf production, back-grounding, finishing, custom feeding, agency/brokerage as well as secondary transportation and crop production activities. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's ban on Canadian cattle and beef imports after a cow in Alberta, Canada was found to have mad cow disease (bovine spongiform encephalopathy). |
Decided in favour of State | United States of America | Canada |
15 | 2004 | Grand River v. USA |
Investment: Controlling shareholding and/or ownership of companies engaged in the tobacco manufacturing and distribution business. Summary: Claims arising out of a 1998 settlement agreement between various state's Attorney General and major tobacco companies (concluded to settle litigation by several U.S. states against certain U.S. cigarette manufacturers), and state legislation that partially implemented the settlement. |
Decided in favour of State | United States of America | Canada |
16 | 2004 | Tembec v. USA |
Investment: Forest products company. Summary: Claims arising out of a number of countervailing duties and antidumping measures adopted by the United States relating to Canadian softwood lumber products, as a result of which the claimant was required to pay duties on these products imported to the United States. |
Settled | United States of America | Canada |
17 | 2004 | Terminal Forest v. USA |
Investment: Forest products company. Summary: Claims arising out of a number of countervailing duties and antidumping measures adopted by the United States relating to Canadian softwood lumber products, as a result of which the claimant was required to pay duties on these products imported to the United States. |
Settled | United States of America | Canada |
18 | 2003 | Glamis Gold v. USA |
Investment: Publicly-held corporation engaged in the mining of precious metals. Summary: Claims arising out of certain federal government actions and California state measures regarding open-pit mining operations, allegedly resulting in injuries to a proposed gold mine in Imperial County, California. |
Decided in favour of State | United States of America | Canada |
19 | 2002 | Canfor v. USA |
Investment: Forest products company. Summary: Claims arising out of a number of countervailing duties and antidumping measures adopted by the United States relating to Canadian softwood lumber products, as a result of which the claimant was required to pay duties on these products imported to the United States. |
Settled | United States of America | Canada |
20 | 2002 | Kenex v. USA |
Investment: Manufacturing, marketing and distributing company of industrial products made from the cannabis plant. Summary: Claims arising out of the Drug Enforcement Administration’s interpretation of the Controlled Substances Act as prohibiting the sale of products that cause the controlled substance THC to enter the human body. |
Discontinued | United States of America | Canada |
21 | 2000 | ADF v. USA |
Investment: Subcontractor to a U.S. company which had entered into a contract with local authorities for a highway construction project. Summary: Claims arising out of the Springfield Interchange Highway construction project in Virginia; particularly, alleged injuries resulting from the federal Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 and implementing regulations requiring that federally-funded state highway projects used only domestically produced steel. |
Decided in favour of State | United States of America | Canada |
22 | 1999 | Methanex v. USA |
Investment: Ownership of marketing and distributing company of methanol. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged injuries resulting from a California ban on the use or sale in California of the gasoline additive MTBE. Methanol, central to the investor's activities, is an ingredient used to manufacture MTBE. |
Decided in favour of State | United States of America | Canada |
23 | 1999 | Mondev v. USA |
Investment: Commercial real estate development contract concluded between the city of Boston and a company owned by the claimant. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged losses suffered by an enterprise owned and controlled by the claimant resulting from a decision by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts and from Massachusetts state law. |
Decided in favour of State | United States of America | Canada |
24 | 1998 | Loewen v. USA |
Investment: Stock holding in corporation dedicated to funeral home operations. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged mistreatment caused to the investor by the state of Mississippi in the course of commercial litigation between the claimant and one of its competitors in the funeral home and funeral insurance business. |
Decided in favour of State | United States of America | Canada |
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2023 | Access v. Mexico |
Investment: Ownership of agricultural land operated by local subsidiary, Nutrilite S.R.L. de C.V., in San Isidoro in the state of Jalisco. Summary: Claims arising out of the government’s decision to seize 280 hectares of agricultural land owned by the claimant and to transfer the land rights to El Ejido San Isidro, a group of local farmers. |
Pending | Mexico | United States of America |
2 | 2023 | Amulsar v. Armenia |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Armenia | United States of America |
3 | 2023 | Arbor Confections and others v. Mexico |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Mexico | United States of America |
4 | 2023 | Arguello v. Honduras |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Honduras | United States of America |
5 | 2023 | BA Desarrollos v. Argentina |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Argentina | United States of America |
6 | 2023 | Cyrus and Contrarian v. Mexico |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Mexico | United States of America |
7 | 2023 | Dekanoidze and T.G. Trade v. Georgia |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Georgia | United States of America |
8 | 2023 | Enerflex and Exterran v. Mexico |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Mexico | United States of America |
9 | 2023 | Noriega Willars v. Mexico |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Mexico | United States of America |
10 | 2023 | Próspera and others v. Honduras |
Investment: Investment in Próspera ZEDE (formerly ZEDE Village of North Bay and ZEDE of North Bay), a special employment and economic development zone (“ZEDE”) on the island of Roatán. Summary: Claims arising out of the government’s actions to repeal the legal framework for special economic zones known as “ZEDE”, allegedly interfering with the Próspera ZEDE in which the claimant had invested. |
Pending | Honduras | United States of America |
11 | 2023 | Ruby v. Canada |
Investment: Indirect ownership of GNL Québec Inc. and Gazoduq Inc., the developers of two proposed energy infrastructure projects in Quebec, through a majority and controlling interest in Symbio Infrastructure Partnership Limited (“Symbio”). Summary: Claims arising out of the government’s 2022 decision to refuse authorization for the construction of the Énergie Saguenay Project, a liquefied natural gas facility project that the claimant had invested in through Symbio. The government’s decision also allegedly stalled the claimant’s parallel natural gas pipeline project in Quebec (the Gazoduq Project). According to the claimant, the government’s rejection of the projects, after a federal agency’s environmental assessment report, and related actions by the province of Quebec were arbitrary and discriminatory. |
Pending | Canada | United States of America |
12 | 2023 | Sepadeve v. Mexico |
Investment: Summary: |
Discontinued | Mexico | United States of America |
13 | 2023 | Silver Bull v. Mexico |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Mexico | United States of America |
14 | 2022 | Amerra and others v. Mexico |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Mexico | United States of America |
15 | 2022 | Amorrortu v. Peru (II) |
Investment: Investments in Baspetrol S.A.C., a company operating in the oil and gas field. Summary: Claims arising out of the decision of PeruPetro, a state-owned petroleum company, to conduct a public bidding process for operating Blocks III and IV of the Talara Basin crude oil reserve, which allegedly deprived the claimant’s company Baspetrol of its right to negotiate directly with PeruPetro. According to the claimant, Baspetrol was allegedly unfairly excluded from the bidding process and PeruPetro awarded the licences to local company Graña y Montero S.A., allegedly as part of a corruption scheme involving the then Government. |
Pending | Peru | United States of America |
16 | 2022 | Blue Sea and Oceans Group v. Panama |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Panama | United States of America |
17 | 2022 | Coeur Mining v. Mexico |
Investment: Ownership of Coeur Mexicana, S.A. de C.V., a local subsidiary with mining concessions for the Palmarejo gold-silver complex. Summary: Claims arising out of Mexican tax authorities’ non-payment of VAT refunds allegedly due to the claimant related to a royalty agreement between Coeur Mexicana and another company for the sale and purchase of Palmarejo gold production. |
Pending | Mexico | United States of America |
18 | 2022 | Doups v. Mexico |
Investment: Shareholding in Soluciones Pagomet CDMX, S. de R.L. de C.V., with two 10-year concession contracts to install and operate parking meters in Mexico City. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s revocation of two concession contracts related to metered parking systems granted in 2018 to Soluciones Pagomet, a local company in which the claimant held shares. |
Pending | Mexico | United States of America |
19 | 2022 | IMC Invest v. Kyrgyzstan |
Investment: Exploration and production licence for the Kamushanovskoye uranium deposit. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s 2019 decision to ban uranium mining, halting the claimant’s mining project at the Kamushanovskoye uranium deposit. |
Pending | Kyrgyzstan | United States of America |
20 | 2022 | ITACO and Dangelas v. Viet Nam |
Investment: Investments in industrial park projects. Summary: Claims arising out of government authorities’ conduct related to bankruptcy proceedings initiated against ITACO over debt allegedly owned to a third party by a subcontractor of ITACO that was involved in the construction of an industrial park. |
Pending | Viet Nam | United States of America |
21 | 2022 | Lynton v. Ecuador |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Ecuador | United States of America |
22 | 2022 | Moussaieff v. Panama |
Investment: Concession contracts for three hydroelectric power plant projects (LALIN I, II and III) held respectively by Panama Power Energy Inc., Panama Energy Finance Inc. and Panama Energy Business Inc. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s 2017 termination of concession contracts for the construction and operation of three hydroelectric plants at the Gatú and Chorrillo rivers, in which the claimant had invested. |
Pending | Panama | United States of America |
23 | 2022 | Sargeant Petroleum v. Dominican Republic |
Investment: Investments in a cement production enterprise. Summary: |
Pending | Dominican Republic | United States of America |
24 | 2022 | Sea Search-Armada v. Colombia |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Colombia | United States of America |
25 | 2022 | Westmoreland v. Canada (III) |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Canada | United States of America |
26 | 2022 | Wu v. Panama |
Investment: Summary: |
Discontinued | Panama | United States of America |
27 | 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 |
28 | 2021 | Finley and others v. Mexico |
Investment: Rights under three oilfield service contracts concluded with state-owned oil company Petróleos Mexicanos (Pemex). Summary: Claims arising out of state-owned oil company Pemex’s suspension of three oilfield service contracts concluded with the claimants as well as Mexico’s alleged failure to exercise regulatory control over Pemex. According to the claimants, they were treated arbitrarily and denied justice by Mexican courts. |
Pending | Mexico | United States of America |
29 | 2021 | IBT and others v. Panama (III) |
Investment: Investments in a construction project. Summary: |
Pending | Panama |
United States of America Spain |
30 | 2021 | Kaloti v. Peru |
Investment: Investments in gold trading and export activities. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged seizure of the claimant’s properties and assets, including gold purchased by the claimant from local suppliers. |
Pending | Peru | United States of America |
31 | 2021 | L1bre v. Mexico |
Investment: Indirect shareholding in Servicios Digitales Lusad, S. de R.L. de C.V. (“Lusad”), a locally incorporated company holding a 10-year concession for the replacement of taximeters in Mexico City. Summary: Claims arising out of a local government’s interference with a concession held by Lusad for digital taximeters and the operation of a mobile taxi application in Mexico City. |
Discontinued | Mexico | United States of America |
32 | 2021 | Philip Morris and others v. Ukraine |
Investment: Summary: |
Discontinued | Ukraine |
Switzerland United States of America |
33 | 2021 | Riverside Coffee v. Nicaragua |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Nicaragua | United States of America |
34 | 2021 | True Blue Development and others v. Grenada |
Investment: Investments in a luxury hotel complex project, the Kimpton Kawana Bay Resort. Summary: Claims arising out of the government’s actions related to a luxury hotel complex project in which the claimants had invested using a funding mechanism under Grenada’s citizenship by investment programme (CBI). Allegedly the government withdrew its earlier approval of a budget increase for the hotel construction project; it limited the spending of CBI funds and halted the approval of CBI applications by potential project investors. |
Settled | Grenada | United States of America |
35 | 2021 | WM Mining v. Mongolia |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Mongolia | United States of America |
36 | 2021 | Won v. Korea |
Investment: Ownership of a residential building in Busan. Summary: Claims arising out of the dispossession of the claimant’s residential building by a redevelopment union allegedly affiliated with a government agency. |
Pending | Korea, Republic of | United States of America |
37 | 2020 | Amorrortu v. Peru (I) |
Investment: Investments in Baspetrol S.A.C., a company operating in the oil and gas field. Summary: Claims arising out of the decision of PeruPetro, a state-owned petroleum company, to conduct a public bidding process for operating Blocks III and IV of the Talara Basin crude oil reserve, which allegedly deprived the claimant’s company Baspetrol of its right to negotiate directly with PeruPetro. According to the claimant, Baspetrol was allegedly unfairly excluded from the bidding process and PeruPetro awarded the licences to local company Graña y Montero S.A., allegedly as part of a corruption scheme involving the then Government. |
Decided in favour of State | Peru | United States of America |
38 | 2020 | Durres and others v. Albania |
Investment: Interests in a joint venture holding a concession contract for the management, operation and maintenance of a container terminal at the port of Durres. Summary: Claims arising out of Albanian authorities’ termination of a 35-year concession contract with the claimants for a shipping terminal at the port of Durres as well as the subsequent takeover of the terminal’s operations and assets by the Durres Port Authority. |
Pending | Albania |
United Kingdom United States of America |
39 | 2020 | Freeport-McMoRan v. Peru |
Investment: Shareholding of 54 per cent in Sociedad Minera Cerro Verde S.A.A. with a mining concession for a copper deposit southwest of Arequipa. Summary: Claims arising out of the national tax authority’s mining royalty assessments on ore processed by Cerro Verde, related penalties and interest charged on Cerro Verde. According to the claimant, a 1998 stability agreement exempted Cerro Verde from royalties on all minerals extracted from its mining concessions. |
Pending | Peru | United States of America |
40 | 2020 | Hope Services v. Cameroon |
Investment: Investments in the operation of an online platform for private donor funding of community development projects through local subsidiary Hope Services SA. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged illegal arrest and imprisonment of the founder of the claimant company on fraud charges, followed by the government’s attempt to acquire the online fundraising platform from the claimant that had been developed based on a government contract signed in 2011. |
Decided in favour of State | Cameroon | United States of America |
41 | 2020 | IBT v. Panama (II) |
Investment: Investments in a construction project in Panama through Consorcio Cefere Panamá. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s termination of a contract with the claimants’ local company Consorcio Cefere Panamá for the construction of a women’s prison, and the imposition of a 3-year ban on the claimants to enter into any government contracts. |
Settled | Panama | United States of America |
42 | 2020 | Koch v. Canada |
Investment: Investments in a business involved in buying and selling publicly issued emission allowances as a registered market participant in the cap-and-trade programme. Summary: Claims arising out of the 2018 cancellation of the cap-and-trade programme by the Canadian province of Ontario and Ontario’s alleged failure to compensate the claimants for the carbon emissions allowances purchased under this programme, which were rendered worthless by the cancellation act. |
Pending | Canada | United States of America |
43 | 2020 | Neustar v. Colombia |
Investment: Ownership of .CO Internet S.A.S., a local telecommunications company holding a 10-year concession for the operation of the ”.CO” domain. Summary: Claims arising out of a Government ministry’s decision not to renew the concession held by the claimant’s wholly-owned local subsidiary for the operation of the “.CO” domain name and to conduct a public tender process for the signature of a new contract. |
Pending | Colombia | United States of America |
44 | 2020 | Sukyas v. Romania (I) |
Investment: Ownership rights in Cinegrafia Română’s (CIRO Films) assets, real estate and business. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged failure to restitute assets in Cinegrafia Română (CIRO Films), a film company held by the claimants’ family members before its seizure by the communist regime in 1948. |
Pending | Romania | United States of America |
45 | 2020 | Telcell v. Georgia |
Investment: Equity ownership in MagtiCom Ltd., a local telecommunications company. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged politically-motivated interference by the Government in the management of MagtiCom, including through the arrest of MagtiCom’s founder on the basis of tax evasion charges and a forced restructuring of the company to the alleged benefit of the State. |
Pending | Georgia | United States of America |
46 | 2020 | Windstream Energy v. Canada (II) |
Investment: Ownership of local subsidiary Windstream Wolfe Island Shoals Inc. (WWIS), which had entered a power purchase agreement under the Ontario Power Authority’s feed-in-tariff programme to develop an offshore wind generation facility in Ontario. Summary: Claims arising out of Ontario Government’s alleged failure to prevent the electricity operator IESO from terminating the feed-in-tariff contract with the claimant’s subsidiary WWIS in 2020, following Ontario Government’s prior moratorium on offshore wind farms that was the subject of the Windstream I arbitration. |
Pending | Canada | United States of America |
47 | 2020 | Worth Capital v. Peru |
Investment: Shareholding in Petróleos de la Selva (formerly Maple Gas Corporation), a company operating the Pucallpa oil and gas refinery in the Ucayali region. Summary: Claims arising out of state entities’ alleged obstruction of the claimant’s business activities at the Pucallpa refinery operated by its local company, leading to the refinery’s closure. |
Discontinued | Peru | United States of America |
48 | 2019 | Amec Foster Wheeler and others v. Colombia |
Investment: Project management consultant contract with state-owned entity Refinería de Cartagena, S.A. (Reficar) related to the refurbishment of a local oil refinery (Cartagena Refinery). Summary: Claims arising out of $2.4 billion liability imposed by the national comptroller general on the claimants’ joint venture for alleged acts of gross negligence or wilful misconduct in the expenditure of state funds related to the Cartagena Refinery modernization project. According to the claimants, the joint venture provided certain limited management consultancy services under a contract with state-owned Reficar, the party allegedly responsible for the misconduct. |
Pending | Colombia | United States of America |
49 | 2019 | Dangelas and others v. Viet Nam |
Investment: Investments in the Kien Luong Thermal Complex Power Project. Summary: |
Pending | Viet Nam | United States of America |
50 | 2019 | Einarsson v. Canada |
Investment: Ownership of Geophysical Service Inc. (GSI), a company creating and licensing seismic data principally for use in oil and gas exploration. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged unilateral disclosure to third parties of proprietary marine seismic data created or acquired by the claimants’ company GSI, without compensation for GSI or the possibility of recourse. According to the claimants, the Government thereby confiscated GSI’s intellectual property rights in the seismic data. |
Pending | Canada | United States of America |
51 | 2019 | Legacy Vulcan v. Mexico |
Investment: Concessions for a port terminal and authorizations for two lime extraction plants (“La Adelita” and “El Corchalito”) held by its local subsidiary, Calizas Industriales de Carmes, S.A. de C.V (“Calica”). Summary: Claims arising out of Government agencies’ revocation of the port concession held by the claimant’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Calica, and the forced closure of Calica’s quarrying operations at the “La Adelita” and “El Corchalito” sites in the State of Quintana Roo. According to the claimant, these events were preceded Government agencies’ unilateral amendments to agreements with Calica and the imposition of allegedly illegal taxes, contested by Calica in several local court cases. |
Pending | Mexico | United States of America |
52 | 2019 | Mamacocha and Latam Hydro v. Peru |
Investment: Rights under a 20-year concession agreement with the Ministry of Energy and Mines to supply
renewable energy to the national grid, and to construct and operate a hydroelectric plant near the Mamacocha Lagoon in the Arequipa region of Peru (the “Mamacocha Project”). Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged breach of a concession agreement for a hydroelectric plant project (the “Mamacocha Project”) through delays of permitting and approval processes, discriminatory and politically motivated interferences by regional authorities, and attempts to unilaterally and unlawfully cancel the project by rendering it impossible to complete. |
Decided in favour of State | Peru | United States of America |
53 | 2019 | Odyssey v. Mexico |
Investment: Seabed mining concession for a phosphate deposit in the Pacific Ocean held by Exploraciones Oceánicas S. de R.L. de C.V., a local subsidiary of the claimant. Summary: Claims arising out of the decision by Mexico’s Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources to deny environmental permits for the claimant’s seabed mining project in the local subsidiary’s concession area, offshore from the coast of Baja California Sur in Mexico. Allegedly, the Ministry’s decision disregarded scientific evidence provided by the claimant in the project development plan and environmental impact assessment. |
Pending | Mexico | United States of America |
54 | 2019 | Seda and others v. Colombia |
Investment: Investments in the construction of “Meritage”, a luxury real estate development project on a 560,000 square meters site in the city of Medellín. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s seizure of property acquired by the Royal Development Group and the suspension of construction works for the claimants’ “Meritage” real estate project on this property, as a result of claims that previous owners used it for criminal activity. |
Pending | Colombia | United States of America |
55 | 2019 | Westmoreland v. Canada (II) |
Investment: Ownership of five coal mines servicing adjacent power plants through mine-mouth operations in the Province of Alberta, Canada. Summary: Claims arising out of the decision of Alberta’s provincial government in 2015 to phase out coal-fired power plants in the province by 2030. The government allegedly failed to compensate the claimant for the early closure of its coal mining operations, excluding it from a compensation scheme made available to three local coal mining operators. |
Decided in favour of State | Canada | United States of America |
56 | 2019 | Worley v. Ecuador |
Investment: Inspection and management contracts with state-owned oil company Petroecuador related to the refurbishment of the Esmeraldas oil refinery. Summary: |
Decided in favour of State | Ecuador | United States of America |
57 | 2018 | Alicia Grace and others v. Mexico |
Investment: Shareholding of 43.2 per cent in Integradora de Servicios Petroleros Oro Negro, S.A.P.I. de C.V. (“Oro Negro”) and 99.9 per cent shareholding in the subsidiary company, Perforadora Oro Negro, S. de R.L. de C.V. (“Perforadora Oro Negro”). Summary: Claims arising out of the early termination of lease agreements by Petróleos Mexicanos (Pemex), a state-owned oil company, for five offshore oil drilling platforms owned by Oro Negro’s subsidiary which is controlled by the claimants. |
Pending | Mexico | United States of America |
58 | 2018 | Bay View and Spalena v. Rwanda |
Investment: Mining rights under a concession contract for the Biserero mining site in Rwanda. Summary: Claims arising out of the revocation by the Government of the claimants’ mining licences and the subsequent award of the mining concession to a different company. |
Decided in favour of State | Rwanda | United States of America |
59 | 2018 | Borkowski and Rasia FZE v. Armenia |
Investment: Concessions to construct and operate railway and highway routes. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged breach of concession contracts granted to the claimants by turning to other companies for the implementation of the infrastructure projects. |
Decided in favour of State | Armenia |
United States of America United Arab Emirates |
60 | 2018 | Carrizosa Gelzis v. Colombia (I) |
Investment: Shareholding in Banco Granahorrar, a Colombian bank. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s allegedly disproportionate and discriminatory measures against Banco Granahorrar, including placing the bank under new management and its ultimate nationalization in 1998, as well as the Colombian Constitutional Court’s 2014 decision that no compensation was due to the claimants. |
Decided in favour of State | Colombia | United States of America |
61 | 2018 | Carrizosa v. Colombia (II) |
Investment: Shareholding in Banco Granahorrar, a Colombian bank. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s allegedly disproportionate and discriminatory measures against Banco Granahorrar, including placing the bank under new management and its ultimate nationalization in 1998, as well as the Colombian Constitutional Court’s 2014 decision that no compensation was due to the claimant. |
Decided in favour of State | Colombia | United States of America |
62 | 2018 | ELA v. Estonia |
Investment: Ownership of Estonian companies that owned and operated the port of Lennusadam in Tallinn. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged interference with the claimant’s investment in the port of Lennusadam, including the invalidation by Estonian courts of the property title to the port, seizure of the claimant’s assets and criminal prosecution of the claimant’s officers. |
Pending | Estonia | United States of America |
63 | 2018 | Elliott v. Korea |
Investment: Shareholding in the Samsung C&T Corporation. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s conduct that allegedly led to the merger of Samsung C&T Corporation with Cheil Industries and thereby caused financial losses to the claimant. |
Decided in favour of investor | Korea, Republic of | United States of America |
64 | 2018 | Iconia v. Georgia |
Investment: Investments in a 2,405 m2 land plot for a real estate development project in the Vake-Saburtalo district of Tbilisi, Georgia. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged measures by Georgian courts and government officials to delay and halt the claimant’s project to construct a commercial-residential apartment complex in the city center of Tbilisi. Allegedly, this included attempts by local opposition to take over the claimant’s land plot, harassment of the claimant’s employees and a refusal to issue construction permits. |
Data not available | Georgia | United States of America |
65 | 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 |
66 | 2018 | Kappes v. Guatemala |
Investment: Ownership of Exploraciones Mineras de Guatemala, S.A. (“Exmingua”), which holds a licence to develop and operate the “El Tambor” gold and silver mining project and an exploration licence for the “Santa Margarita” mining project. Summary: Claims arising out of Guatemalan courts’ suspension of Exmingua’s mining licences for the “El Tambor” project and the company’s right to export minerals, related to amparo actions for alleged failure to conduct consultations with local communities. According to the claimants, the Government has also failed to provide Exmingua with access to the “Santa Margarita” mining site, which was blocked by protesters. |
Pending | Guatemala | United States of America |
67 | 2018 | Mason v. Korea |
Investment: Minority shareholding in Samsung C&T Corporation ("Samsung C&T") and Samsung Electronics, Inc. Summary: Claims arising out of senior government officials’ alleged measures to enable a merger of Samsung C&T with a Samsung affiliate, Cheil Industries Incorporated (“Cheil”), on terms favourable to a large domestic Cheil shareholder. This was allegedly done by substantially undervaluing Samsung C&T and caused losses to the claimants’ shareholding. |
Pending | Korea, Republic of | United States of America |
68 | 2018 | Orlandini-Ágreda and Compañía Minera Orlandini v. Bolivia |
Investment: Mining concessions for the “Veneros San Juan” and “Pretoria” mining areas, located in the municipality of Antequera in western Bolivia. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged interference with and illegal expropriation of the claimants’ two mining concessions in Antequera. A state-owned mining company also allegedly conducted illegal mining activities within the claimants’ concession area and was granted concessions partly overlapping with the claimants’ pre-existing mining rights. |
Decided in favour of State | Bolivia, Plurinational State of | United States of America |
69 | 2018 | Renco v. Peru (II) |
Investment: Investments in the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex through Doe Run Peru S.R. LTDA (“DRP”), an indirectly owned affiliate through Doe Run Cayman. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged imposition of additional environmental obligations related to the La Oroya mining operations in which the claimant’s affiliate Doe Rue Peru held interests and the Government’s refusal to grant reasonable extensions to complete environmental projects at the site, allegedly forcing the company to cease operations, followed by bankruptcy and liquidation. |
Pending | Peru | United States of America |
70 | 2018 | Seo v. Korea |
Investment: Partial ownership (76%) of a residential property in Seoul. Summary: Claims arising out of the allegedly insufficient amount of compensation set by the Government for the claimant’s real estate property that had been expropriated following the municipal government’s designation of the relevant area for redevelopment. |
Decided in favour of State | Korea, Republic of | United States of America |
71 | 2018 | The Carlyle Group and others v. Morocco |
Investment: Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged seizure of petroleum products stored at the oil refinery Société Anonyme Marocaine de l'Industrie du Raffinage (SAMIR), including oil owned by the claimants. The Government halted production at the plant and placed it under judicial liquidation controlled by trustees, allegedly due to the refinery’s financial difficulties and tax debt. |
Settled | Morocco | United States of America |
72 | 2018 | Westmoreland v. Canada (I) |
Investment: Ownership of five coal mines servicing adjacent power plants through mine-mouth operations in the Province of Alberta, Canada. Summary: Claims arising out of the decision of Alberta’s provincial government in 2015 to phase out coal-fired power plants in the province by 2030. The government allegedly failed to compensate the claimant for the early closure of its coal mining operations, excluding it from a compensation scheme made available to three local coal mining operators. |
Discontinued | Canada | United States of America |
73 | 2018 | Westwater Resources v. Turkey |
Investment: Licences for the exploration and development of two uranium mines, held by the local subsidiary Adur Madencilik Limited Sireketi. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s revocation of seven exploration and operating licences for the Temrezli and Sefaatli uranium mining projects, allegedly due to the creation of a state monopoly over uranium mining activities in the country. |
Decided in favour of investor | Türkiye | United States of America |
74 | 2017 | Aggarwal and others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina |
Investment: Majority shareholding in Krajina osiguranje a.d. Banja Luka (“Krajina”), a local partly State-owned insurance company. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged freeze of the claimants’ shareholding in the insurance company Krajina and other actions allegedly taken by Bosnian regulatory agencies to prevent the claimants from exercising their majority ownership rights in Krajina, after the claimants had accused the Bosnian authorities of fraudulent misrepresentations in the offering prospectus on which they had relied when purchasing the shares. |
Decided in favour of State | Bosnia and Herzegovina |
India United States of America |
75 | 2017 | APR Energy and others v. Australia |
Investment: Rental agreement for power generation equipment with Forge Group Power Pty LTD (“Forge Group”). Summary: Claims arising out of the ANZ Bank’s alleged illegal seizure of the claimants’ turbines for power generation, which were leased by the claimants to Forge Group prior to its insolvency and recovered by the ANZ Bank as property for the payment of the Group’s debt, as well as an Australian court decision to the claimants’ detriment. |
Pending | Australia | United States of America |
76 | 2017 | Arin Capital and Khudyan v. Armenia |
Investment: Investment in a real estate development project that included a plan to sell luxury apartments in the Armenian capital. Summary: Claims arising out of Armenia’s alleged failure to act on the claimants’ repeated pleas that they were defrauded by the local business partner. According to the claimants, Armenia’s officials and courts did nothing to investigate and correct the alleged fraud. |
Decided in favour of State | Armenia | United States of America |
77 | 2017 | Big Sky Energy v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Indirect shareholding through Canadian subsidiary Big Sky Energy Kazakhstan Ltd. (“Big Sky Canada”) in Kazakhstani oil and gas company Kozhan LLP, which held exploration and development rights to three oil fields in Kazakhstan. Summary: Claims arising out of a series of alleged illegal actions by the Government and its courts, including domestic judicial proceedings through which Big Sky Canada allegedly lost its 100 per cent shareholding in Kozan to the original Kazakhstani shareholders, without being compensated for the dispossession. |
Decided in favour of State | Kazakhstan | United States of America |
78 | 2017 | Gabourel Family Trust v. Honduras |
Investment: Ownership of land in Honduras. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged illegal expropriation by Honduras of the claimants’ property for the purposes of constructing an airport. |
Settled | Honduras | United States of America |
79 | 2017 | MetLife v. Argentina |
Investment: Investments in a private pension fund company. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s nationalization of the country’s private pension system in 2008 and the seizure of the claimants’ underlying investments. |
Pending | Argentina | United States of America |
80 | 2017 | Tennant Energy v. Canada |
Investment: Ownership of Skyway 127 Wind Energy Inc., an enterprise that planned to develop a wind farm in Ontario. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged unfair treatment of the claimant’s wind farm project through certain regulatory measures, and Ontario’s allegedly non-transparent administration of the feed-in tariff programme for renewable energy sources. |
Decided in favour of State | Canada | United States of America |
81 | 2017 | The Lopez-Goyne Family Trust and others v. Nicaragua |
Investment: Investments in excess of USD 70 million, in exploration activities relating to an oil concession granted to a Nicaraguan company Industria Oklahoma Nicaragua S.A, allegedly leading to significant oil discoveries, estimated to generate over USD 1 billion in revenue over the concession’s 30-year exploitation phase. Summary: Claims arising out of the termination of a 3,400 square kilometre concession for hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation. |
Decided in favour of State | Nicaragua | United States of America |
82 | 2017 | Vento v. Mexico |
Investment: Investments in manufacturing of motorcycles. Summary: Claims arising out of Mexico’s allegedly discriminatory treatment of the claimant, which includes subjecting Vento’s motorcycles to a 30 per cent import duty (on the ground that they are in fact made in China, not in the United States), whereas the claimant’s competitors do not pay such import duty. |
Decided in favour of State | Mexico | United States of America |
83 | 2016 | B-Mex and others v. Mexico |
Investment: Ownership interests in several gaming facilities in Mexico. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged unlawful interference with the claimants’ casino business in Mexico, including raids on facilities, seizure of equipment and bank account funds, closure of facilities and invalidation of a gaming permit. |
Pending | Mexico | United States of America |
84 | 2016 | Bridgestone v. Panama |
Investment: Investments in a tyre and rubber products enterprise and related registered trademarks. Summary: Claims arising out of a decision of the Supreme Court of Panama which held that Bridgestone’s motion to oppose the registration of the Riverstone trademark by tyre-maker Muresa had been in bad faith, and awarded USD 5.4 million in damages to Muresa. According to the claimants, their challenge to the trademark application was a good-faith effort due to the trademark’s similarity to two of Bridgestone’s own registered trademarks. |
Decided in favour of State | Panama | United States of America |
85 | 2016 | Champion Holding Company and others v. Egypt |
Investment: Summary: |
Decided in favour of State | Egypt | United States of America |
86 | 2016 | Cosigo Resources and others v. Colombia |
Investment: Interests in the gold mining concession for the Taraira South mining site in south-eastern Colombia. Summary: Claims arising out of a 2009 resolution that established the Yaigojé Apaporis national park and that was allegedly passed with significant procedural flaws. The establishment of the national park entailed the cessation of the mining activities at a gold ore deposit, for which the claimants signed an exploration and exploitation concession. |
Data not available | Colombia | United States of America |
87 | 2016 | Dominion Minerals v. Panama |
Investment: Ownership of Cuprum Resources Corp., which held concession rights for the Cerro Chorcha mining property. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s refusal to extend a mining exploration concession for the Cerro Chorcha mining property in Western Panama. The concession was held by the claimant’s local subsidiary Cuprum under the 2006 contract with Panama, concluded for an initial period of four years with the possibility of renewal for two additional 2-year terms. The Ministry of Commerce and Industries issued a resolution rejecting the extension application and declared Cerro Chorcha a “mineral reserve” area on which all exploration or extraction work was prohibited. |
Decided in favour of investor | Panama | United States of America |
88 | 2016 | Gramercy v. Peru |
Investment: Ownership of 9,700 Peruvian Agrarian Land Reform Bonds (the bonds had been issued to Peruvian citizens in compensation for the expropriation of agrarian land in the late 1960s and acquired by the claimants between 2006 and 2008). Summary: Claims arising out of a 2013 decision of Peru’s Constitutional Tribunal and subsequent Supreme Decrees passed in 2014 that related to the repayment scheme for government-issued land reform bonds. The said decisions prescribed the value of the bonds to be determined by using a specific method, which allegedly diminished the total value of the bonds, owned by the claimants, from USD 1.6 billion to USD 1.1 million. |
Decided in favour of investor | Peru | United States of America |
89 | 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 |
90 | 2016 | Italba v. Uruguay |
Investment: Ownership of subsidiary Trigosul S.A., which held a wireless spectrum licence. Summary: Claims arising out of revocation in 2011 of a wireless spectrum licence held since 2000 by the claimant’s subsidiary Trigosul. The State regulatory authority allegedly transferred the licence to another telecommunications company and did not comply with an administrative court’s decision to reinstate the licence. |
Decided in favour of State | Uruguay | United States of America |
91 | 2016 | LP Egypt and others v. Egypt |
Investment: Summary: |
Settled | Egypt | United States of America |
92 | 2016 | Nelson v. Mexico |
Investment: Majority ownership of Tele Fácil México, S.A. de C.V (“Tele Fácil”), a locally incorporated company with a concession to operate as a telecommunications provider. Summary: Claims arising out of certain decisions by Mexico’s federal telecommunications regulator IFT related to a disagreement between Tele Fácil and a large telecommunications provider in Mexico, Telmex, over the terms of an interconnection agreement. Allegedly, IFT failed to enforce a resolution, which it had rendered in Tele Fácil’s favour, and subsequently issued decisions that resolved the disagreement with Telmex to the claimant's detriment, rendering Tele Fácil commercially unviable and denying it access to the Mexican telecommunications market. According to the claimant, IFT subjected Tele Fácil to disproportionate enforcement actions and Mexican courts failed to address IFT’s misconduct. |
Decided in favour of State | Mexico | United States of America |
93 | 2016 | Omega Engineering and Rivera v. Panama |
Investment: Contracts for the construction of three medical hospitals, a higher education centre, a municipal hall, a court house and certain other facilities. Summary: Claims arising out of allegedly unfair treatment by the new Government, including non-payment for the construction of public buildings as well as criminal proceedings against the claimants relating to anti-corruption investigations. |
Decided in favour of State | Panama | United States of America |
94 | 2015 | Hourani v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Ownership of pharmaceuticals manufacturer, Pharm Industry. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged unlawful expropriation and liquidation of a pharmaceuticals manufacturer, Pharm Industry including the alleged seizure of a 10-hectare plot of land transferred from Issam Hourani to Pharm Industry as well as the annulment of a decree that had granted Pharm Industry ownership of a 42-hectare plot of land. |
Settled | Kazakhstan |
United Kingdom United States of America |
95 | 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 |
96 | 2015 | Mobil v. Canada (II) |
Investment: Indirect controlling shareholding in two companies, Hibernia Management and Development Co. and Terra Nova Oil Development Project, engaged in two petroleum development projects off the coast of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in Canada. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s continued enforcement of the 2004 Guidelines for Research and Development Expenditures, which allegedly resulted in expenditures incurred by the claimant in 2012-2015. A previous tribunal, Mobil and Murphy v. Canada, found the Guidelines to violate NAFTA and awarded the claimants a portion of the damages sought. |
Settled | Canada | United States of America |
97 | 2015 | Resolute Forest v. Canada |
Investment: Ownership of Laurentide paper mill. Summary: Claims arising out of measures taken by the provincial Government in Nova Scotia and the Government of Canada, which allegedly discriminated in favour of the competitor’s Port Hawkesbury paper mill and resulted, among other damages, in the closing of claimant's Laurentide paper mill in October 2014. |
Decided in favour of State | Canada | United States of America |
98 | 2014 | Aven and others v. Costa Rica |
Investment: Shareholdings in several enterprises engaged in a construction project in Costa Rica known as Las Olas Project; ownership of 39 hectares of land in connection with this project. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's termination of claimants' hotel, beach club and villas construction project, following the revocation of an environmental viability permit after determining that the property included wetlands and a protected forest, and criminal investigations against one of the claimants. |
Decided in favour of State | Costa Rica | United States of America |
99 | 2014 | Ballantine v. Dominican Republic |
Investment: Ownership of Jamaca de Dios SRL and Aroma de la Montaña, E.I.R.L that were used to make investments in real estate and infrastructure to create a gated complex of luxury homes, restaurants, a hotel and a spa. Summary: Claims arising out of the rejection by the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources of the claimants’ request to expand Jamaca de Dios, a residential and tourism project in the municipality of Jarabacoa, as well as other actions by the central and local government. |
Decided in favour of State | Dominican Republic | United States of America |
100 | 2014 | Cockrell v. Viet Nam |
Investment: Summary: |
Discontinued | Viet Nam | United States of America |
101 | 2014 | Corona Materials v. Dominican Republic |
Investment: Ownership of an exploitation concession for the Joama area with the intention of mining for aggregate material in the Dominican Republic. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's refusal to grant an environmental permit to the claimant which effectively prevented Corona Materials from building and operating a construction aggregate mine in the Dominican Republic, despite allegedly receiving assurances and previous formal approvals from senior government officials. |
Decided in favour of State | Dominican Republic | United States of America |
102 | 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 |
103 | 2014 | IBT Group and others v. Panama (I) |
Investment: Rights under a contract for the rehabilitation of four asphalt manufacturing plants held by claimants' subsidiary CCE. Summary: Claims arising out of disagreements with Panama's Public Works Ministry concerning the performance of a concession to rehabilitate and operate four asphalt manufacturing enterprises held by claimants' subsidiary that led to the unilateral termination of the contract by Panama. |
Settled | Panama | United States of America |
104 | 2014 | Longyear v. Canada |
Investment: Shareholding in a Canadian company, J.M. Longyear Canada, that operated an Ontario forestry land of approximately 63,000 acres. Summary: Claims arising out of claimant's alleged ineligibility for tax reductions under an Ontario law, the Managed Forest Tax Incentive Program, on the basis that the majority of shares in Lonyear's local enterprise were not held by Canadian nationals. |
Discontinued | Canada | United States of America |
105 | 2013 | Berkowitz v. Costa Rica |
Investment: Ownership of twenty six beachfront plots of land on Costa Rica’s Pacific coast. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation of claimant's property to create an ecological park without fair compensation. |
Discontinued | Costa Rica | United States of America |
106 | 2013 | Eli Lilly v. Canada |
Investment: Patents for two pharmaceutical products, Strattera and Zyprexa. Summary: Claims arising out of the invalidation of the claimant's Strattera and Zyprexa pharmaceutical patents by Canada. |
Decided in favour of State | Canada | United States of America |
107 | 2013 | KBR v. Mexico |
Investment: Rights under contracts for the construction of two offshore gas platforms held through KBR's wholly-owned subsidiary; ICC arbitral award. Summary: Claims arising out of the Mexican courts' annulment of an International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) arbitration award issued in favour of claimant's subsidiary, COMMISA, concerning a contractual dispute with a Mexican State-owned entity. |
Decided in favour of State | Mexico | United States of America |
108 | 2013 | Lone Pine v. Canada |
Investment: Rights under oil and gas exploration permits held by a wholly-owned Canadian subsidiary. Summary: Claims arising out of the revocation by the Government of Quebec of claimant's permits for petroleum and natural gas exploration in the Utica shale gas basin, including beneath the St. Lawrence River. |
Decided in favour of State | Canada | United States of America |
109 | 2013 | Transglobal v. Panama |
Investment: Indirect ownership interest (70 per cent) and control over a 50-year concession to operate the Bajo de Mina hydroelectric power plant. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's cancellation of a hydro-electric power plant concession and its alleged subsequent failure to abide by Panama Supreme Court's decision that reinstated the investor in its rights to the concession. |
Decided in favour of State | Panama | United States of America |
110 | 2013 | Windstream Energy v. Canada (I) |
Investment: Ownership of WWIS (100 per cent shareholding), a Canadian corporation that had entered into a power purchase agreement under the Ontario Power Authority’s feed-in-tariff program to develop an offshore wind generation facility in Ontario. Summary: Claims arising out of a moratorium imposed by the Government of Ontario on offshore wind farms that indefinitely suspended claimant's investment project in this sector. |
Decided in favour of investor | Canada | United States of America |
111 | 2012 | Ampal-American and others v. Egypt |
Investment: Shareholding in a consortium that held a long term gas supply contract with the Egyptian General Petroleum Corporation and the Egyptian Natural Gas Holdings. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged breaches of a long term contract for the supply of natural gas between the parties, including the prolonged interruption of gas supply and failure to deliver the agreed volume of gas. |
Settled | Egypt |
United States of America Germany |
112 | 2012 | Levitis v. Kyrgyzstan |
Investment: Shareholding in Asia Universal Bank, a Kyrgyzstan-based commercial bank. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged losses relating to claimant's shareholding in a commercial bank nationalized by Kyrgyzstan. |
Discontinued | Kyrgyzstan | United States of America |
113 | 2012 | Mercer v. Canada |
Investment: Ownership and operation, through claimant's wholly-owned Canadian subsidiary Zellstoff Celgar Limited, of an industrial plant consisting of a pulp mill and a biomass-based electricity generation facility, located in British Columbia. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged failure by Canadian regulatory agencies (BC Hydro and Power Authority, the British Columbia Utilities Commission and the BC Ministry of Energy and Mines) to implement a uniform treatment for pulp mills and other customers with self-generated power capacity in the Province of British Columbia and allegedly denying claimant's subsidiary the benefits available to its competitors. |
Decided in favour of State | Canada | United States of America |
114 | 2012 | Nadel v. Kyrgyzstan |
Investment: Minority shareholding in Asia Universal Bank, a Kyrgyzstan-based commercial bank. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged losses relating to claimants' shareholding in a commercial bank nationalized by Kyrgyzstan. |
Discontinued | Kyrgyzstan |
Russian Federation United States of America |
115 | 2011 | Al Tamimi v. Oman |
Investment: Controlling shareholding in two investment vehicle companies that had concluded two 25-year lease agreements with the state-owned mining company OMCO to quarry limestone in the Buraimi region of Oman. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's alleged harassment and interference in the operation of claimant's mining companies in Oman, leading to the termination of the relevant lease agreements and the confiscation of the mining facilities by the Royal Oman police. |
Decided in favour of State | Oman | United States of America |
116 | 2011 | Detroit International v. Canada |
Investment: Ownership and control of a Canadian company that constructed and operated an international toll bridge between Michigan and Ontario. Summary: Claims arising out of legislation passed by the Government of Canada giving it authority over the construction, operation and ownership of international bridges, and its alleged effect upon to the Ambassador Bridge, which spans the Detroit River between Detroit and Windsor, Canada, in which the claimant had invested. |
Decided in favour of State | Canada | United States of America |
117 | 2011 | Merck v. Ecuador |
Investment: Ownership of a pharmaceutical manufacturing company located in Ecuador. Summary: Claims arising out of judicial proceedings before Ecuadorian courts concerning claimant's refusal to sell a pharmaceutical factory to the Ecuadorian company NIFA, which allegedly resulted in a denial of justice. |
Decided in favour of investor | Ecuador | United States of America |
118 | 2011 | Mesa Power v. Canada |
Investment: Indirect ownership and control of four wind farms in southwestern Ontario. Summary: Claims arising out of various government measures related to the regulation and production of renewable energy in Ontario, Canada, that allegedly imposed sudden changes to the established scheme of a feed-in-tariff program. |
Decided in favour of State | Canada | United States of America |
119 | 2011 | Murphy v. Ecuador (II) |
Investment: Shares of stock in local operating company that had concluded a service contract with Ecuador for the exploration and exploitation of hydrocarbons. Summary: Claims arising out of Ecuador's enactment of Law No. 42 imposing a 99 per cent windfall levy on foreign oil revenues that allegedly resulted in the expropriation of Murphy's investment in Block 16 of the Ecuadorian Amazon, an oil-rich region bordering Peru and Brazil. |
Decided in favour of investor | Ecuador | United States of America |
120 | 2011 | Renco v. Peru (I) |
Investment: Interests in the mining project of La Oroya held through a wholly-owned affiliate; rights under certain stock transfer agreement and guaranty agreement. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged arbitrary and unfair application of government measures and contracts related to interests in the mining operations in La Oroya, which Renco owned through its wholly-owned affiliate, Doe Run Peru S.R. LTDA. |
Decided in favour of State | Peru | United States of America |
121 | 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 |
122 | 2011 | St. Marys v. Canada |
Investment: Ownership and control of a Canadian company that had applied for permits to open a dolostone rock quarry on agricultural land near the city of Hamilton. Summary: Claims arising out of various measures taken by the Government of Ontario, the City of Hamilton, the Town of Milton and the Halton Region allegedly affecting the investor’s proposal to convert agricultural lands in the Hamilton region into an aggregate quarry. |
Settled | Canada | United States of America |
123 | 2010 | AbitibiBowater v. Canada |
Investment: Ownership and/or operation of pulp and paper manufacturing enterprises in Canada; associated land rights, timber rights, real property rights (hydro assets), water use rights established through several deeds, leases, easements and other contractual agreements. Summary: Claims arising out of a legislation passed by the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to expropriate AbitibiBowater Inc.’s water and timber rights and hydroelectric assets in the province. |
Settled | Canada | United States of America |
124 | 2010 | AES v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Ownership of a number of power facilities and trading companies that held rights under long-term concessions concluded with the Government. Summary: Claims arising out of a series of actions including fines and tariff restrictions imposed to claimants by Kazakh competition authorities concerning energy prices that allegedly had adverse financial impacts on the company’s operations in the country. |
Decided in favour of neither party (liability found but no damages awarded) | Kazakhstan |
United States of America Netherlands |
125 | 2010 | Awdi v. Romania |
Investment: Majority shareholding in a press distribution company that held a concession to operate kiosks across Romania; ownership of a historical building in the centre of Bucharest serving as boutique hotel and restaurant. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's alleged failure to protect claimants' press distribution and boutique hotel investments, following a decision issued by the Romanian Constitutional Court declaring a law that guaranteed claimants' investment as unconstitutional. |
Decided in favour of investor | Romania | United States of America |
126 | 2010 | Greiner v. Canada |
Investment: Sole shareholding in a Quebec-based lodge and outfitting company; capital contributions of over CAD 1.5 million to construct lodging facilities, purchasing water rights and licenses, marketing and maintenance of the business. Summary: Claims arising out of the decision by the Government of Quebec to modify its lottery system for fishing licenses and the revocation of the investor's authorizations of commerce which were necessary to conduct claimants' fishing tour operations in Quebec. |
Discontinued | Canada | United States of America |
127 | 2010 | Guaracachi v. Bolivia |
Investment: Indirect controlling shareholding in Bolivian company that held a 30 year electricity generation license; associated licenses and permits; capital contributions for acquisition of energy generation assets including several gas turbines and gas engines. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's nationalisation of Guaracachi America, Inc. and of Rurelec's controlling 50.001 per cent shareholding in the Bolivian electricity company Empresa Eléctrica Guaracachi, as well as the alleged failure by the claimants to obtain justice through the Bolivian court system and the subsequent seizure of assets owned by Rurelec’s subsidiary, Energía para Sistemas Aislados Energais S.A. |
Decided in favour of investor | Bolivia, Plurinational State of |
United Kingdom United States of America |
128 | 2010 | McKenzie v. Viet Nam |
Investment: Indirect ownership of an investment license to develop a coastal resort in Vietnam’s province of Binh Thuan. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged Government's failure to transfer certain land rights to claimant's locally incorporated subsidiary necessary for the development of a tourism resort. |
Decided in favour of State | Viet Nam | United States of America |
129 | 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 |
130 | 2010 | Pan American v. Bolivia |
Investment: Shareholding in Pan American's subsidiary Chaco Petroleum, which held hydrocarbons exploration and exploitation rights in Bolivia. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's nationalization of the Chaco Petroleum Company, a subsidiary in which Pan American held a 50 per cent interest. |
Settled | Bolivia, Plurinational State of | United States of America |
131 | 2010 | RSM v. Ecuador |
Investment: Rights under a mining license. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged Government's wrongful termination of a mining license for a tar-sands project in Ecuador. |
Pending | Ecuador | United States of America |
132 | 2010 | RSM v. Grenada |
Investment: Rights under a petroleum exploration agreement under which RSM would apply for, and Grenada would grant, a petroleum exploration licence within 90 days of the agreement’s effective date. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's refusal to grant RSM a petroleum exploration licence by considering that the application was untimely. |
Decided in favour of State | Grenada | United States of America |
133 | 2010 | TECO v. Guatemala |
Investment: Shareholding in Empresa Eléctrica de Guatemala, a local electricity distribution company that held rights under certain authorization agreement for distribution of electricity in the departments of Guatemala, Sacatepéquez and Escuintla, for a period of 50 years. Summary: Claims arising out of Guatemala’s electricity regulator decision to set tariffs for the electricity company in which the claimant had an investment based on an independently commissioned technical study rather than on a study commissioned by the electricity company, during the process of review and pricing of electricity distribution tariffs for the five-year period 2008-2013. |
Decided in favour of investor | Guatemala | United States of America |
134 | 2009 | Centurion v. Canada |
Investment: Ownership of a Canadian corporation that had contracted for the purchase of 9.5 acres in Vancouver to build a privately-owned health center in Canada; capital expenses related to the construction of such health centre. Summary: Claims arising out of the planned construction by the claimants of a private healthcare facility intended to offer a wide range of surgical services in Vancouver, British Columbia, and the alleged impediment of the project's completion by a range of legislative and administrative measures adopted by the local, provincial and federal governments. |
Discontinued | Canada | United States of America |
135 | 2009 | Chevron and TexPet v. Ecuador (II) |
Investment: Oil exploration and production rights in Ecuador’s Amazon region through concession contracts concluded with the Government. Summary: Claims arising out of Texaco's historical activities under oil concession contracts, and the alleged Government's misconduct in subsequent domestic litigation against Texaco for environmental remediation (in the so-called “Lago Agrio” judgment of 2012, the Ecuadorian court ordered Chevron and TexPet to pay USD 9.5 billion for environmental damage). |
Pending | Ecuador | United States of America |
136 | 2009 | Commerce Group v. El Salvador |
Investment: Rights under exploration licenses and environmental permits granted to the claimants by the Government for mining of precious metals and related activities in El Salvador. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's termination of a 30-year mining concession to the claimants, following the withdrawal of environmental permits. |
Decided in favour of State | El Salvador | United States of America |
137 | 2009 | Dow AgroSciences v. Canada |
Investment: Indirect ownership of a Canadian corporation engaged in the manufacture and sale of specialty chemical products (i.e. claimant's indirect wholly-owned subsidiary). Summary: Claims arising out of losses allegedly caused by a Quebec ban on the sale and certain uses of lawn pesticides containing the active ingredient 2,4-D which the claimant manufactured in the United States for sale to various companies in numerous countries, including Canada. |
Settled | Canada | United States of America |
138 | 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 |
139 | 2009 | H&H v. Egypt |
Investment: Rights under a hotel management and operation contract concluded between the claimant and Grand Hotels of Egypt (GHE), a company owned by the Egyptian Government; option to buy in the form of a one-page letter addressed to the then chairman of GHE. Summary: Claims arising out of disagreements between the parties concerning a contract to manage and operate a resort in El Ain El Sokhna including the denial of claimant's alleged right to purchase the resort under an option to buy agreement leading to litigation before domestic courts and the Government's subsequent eviction of H&H from the resort. |
Decided in favour of State | Egypt | United States of America |
140 | 2009 | Itera v. Georgia (II) |
Investment: Rights under a Debt Restructuring Agreement concluded between Georgia and the claimants concerning debts to Itera of various Georgian public sector organizations and state-owned companies related to gas supply services. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged restructuring of significant gas debts owed by Georgian state-owned entities to Itera and actions subsequently taken by Georgia that rendered the claimants’ investments valueless, including the bankruptcy proceedings of a chemical fertilizer plant in the city of Rustavi in which Itera had acquired a majority shareholding. |
Settled | Georgia |
United States of America Netherlands |
141 | 2009 | Pac Rim v. El Salvador |
Investment: Sole ownership of certain Salvadoran mining companies that held rights conferred by exploration licenses, authorizations and permits, including the right to a mining exploitation concession in the area known as "EI Dorado"; related capital expenditures. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's refusal to issue necessary mining licences for Pacific Rim’s El Dorado gold mining project in northern El Salvador due to alleged environmental concerns including the company’s use of certain chemicals in the extraction process. |
Decided in favour of State | El Salvador | United States of America |
142 | 2009 | Ulysseas v. Ecuador |
Investment: Rights under two power barge agreements concluded between claimant, a special purpose vehicle owned by the US hedge fund Elliott Associates, and Ecuador's electricity regulator Conelec to generate electricity during a period of severe national shortages. Summary: Claims arising out of several Government measures that allegedly altered the legal and regulatory framework governing the power sector in Ecuador, including the payment system applicable to private thermoelectric generators like Ulysseas, and the State's subsequent withdrawal of claimant's operating permit due to alleged contractual breaches. |
Decided in favour of State | Ecuador | United States of America |
143 | 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 |
144 | 2008 | Burlington v. Ecuador |
Investment: Rights under production sharing contracts for the exploration and exploitation of Blocks 7 and 21, concluded between a Burlington wholly-owned subsidiary and Ecuador. Summary: Claims arising out of Ecuador's enactment of a law imposing a 99 per cent windfall levy on foreign oil revenues as a result of an oil spike starting in 2002, the Government's decision to migrate to service contracts and the subsequent caducidad process to terminate the investor's production sharing agreements. |
Decided in favour of investor | Ecuador | United States of America |
145 | 2008 | Caratube v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Rights under an oil exploration and production contract concluded between the Kazakh Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources and a company which later assigned such contractual rights to Caratube, owned and controlled in its majority by a U.S. national. Summary: Claims arising out of the termination by the Government of Caratube’s licence to an oilfield in Kazakhstan and allegations that the investor had been continuously harassed by the authorities. |
Decided in favour of State | Kazakhstan | United States of America |
146 | 2008 | Clayton/Bilcon v. Canada |
Investment: Ownership and control of the Canadian company Bilcon of Nova Scotia and a lease agreement entered by this company for the property on which a quarry and marine terminal were to be developed. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's rejection of the investors' project to operate a quarry and marine terminal in the Canadian province of Nova Scotia, following a negative environmental assessment process. |
Decided in favour of investor | Canada | United States of America |
147 | 2008 | Itera v. Georgia (I) |
Investment: Rights under a Debt Restructuring Agreement concluded between Georgia and the claimants concerning debts to Itera of various Georgian public sector organizations and state-owned companies related to gas supply services. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged restructuring of significant gas debts owed by Georgian state-owned entities to Itera and actions subsequently taken by Georgia that rendered the claimants’ investments valueless, including the bankruptcy proceedings of a chemical fertilizer plant in the city of Rustavi in which Itera had acquired a majority shareholding. |
Discontinued | Georgia |
Netherlands United States of America |
148 | 2008 | iZee v. Georgia |
Investment: Fifty percent shareholding in each of three Georgian companies, Lazer-2 and SonyCentre-Tiblisi which sold Sony products in Georgia, and Café Rustaveli, a Georgian restaurant. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged seizure of claimant's business premises in Tbilisi by officers from the Georgian Interior Department. |
Settled | Georgia | United States of America |
149 | 2008 | Murphy v. Ecuador (I) |
Investment: Minority shareholding in local operating company that had concluded a service contract with Ecuador for the exploration and exploitation of hydrocarbons. Summary: Claims arising out of Ecuador's enactment of Law No. 42 imposing a 99 per cent windfall levy on foreign oil revenues that allegedly resulted in the expropriation of Murphy's investment in Block 16 of the Ecuadorian Amazon, an oil-rich region bordering Peru and Brazil. |
Decided in favour of State | Ecuador | United States of America |
150 | 2007 | Gallo v. Canada |
Investment: Ownership of all shares of 1532382 Ontario Inc., an Ontario corporation that owned and controlled a former mine site in Northern Ontario. Summary: Claims arising out of Mr. Gallo’s Canadian company ownership of a former open-pit iron ore mine (the Adams Mine Site) that was intended to serve as a landfill for non-hazardous household and commercial waste from the City of Toronto and the Ontario Legislature’s imposition of Bill 49, which prevented disposal of waste at the Adams Mine Site. |
Decided in favour of State | Canada | United States of America |
151 | 2007 | Global Gold Mining v. Armenia |
Investment: License holder for the operation of mines in six locations in Armenia: Hanakavan, Marjan, Toukhmanuk, Getik, Lichkvaz-Tey and Terterasar. Summary: Claims arising out of the decision of Armenia's Ministry of Environment to deny Global Gold the renewal of old mining licenses and the refusal to grant it new licenses, to which the investor considered it was entitled. |
Settled | Armenia | United States of America |
152 | 2007 | Mobil and Murphy v. Canada (I) |
Investment: Indirect controlling shareholding in two companies, Hibernia Management and Development Co. and Terra Nova Oil Development Project, engaged in two petroleum development projects off the coast of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in Canada. Summary: Claims arising out of changes in the regulatory regime applicable to the exploitation of two oil fields located off the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador in which the claimants had invested; particularly, the imposition of research and development expenditure requirements by the Canadian province of Newfoundland. |
Decided in favour of investor | Canada | United States of America |
153 | 2007 | Mobil and others v. Venezuela |
Investment: Interests in two extra-heavy crude oil projects located in the Venezuelan region of the Orinoco Oil Belt, under profit sharing agreements concluded with the Government. Summary: Claims arising out of Venezuela's nationalization of two oil projects in which the claimants had interests known as the Cerro Negro Project and La Ceiba Project (after having increased their applicable royalty rate and income tax) and subsequent disagreements between the parties concerning the amount of compensation owed to the investor. |
Decided in favour of investor | Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of |
Bahamas United States of America Netherlands |
154 | 2007 | RDV v. Guatemala |
Investment: Rights under an usufruct contract concluded between a State-owned company and a Guatemalan company majority-owned and controlled by the claimant. Summary: Claims arising out of a "Lesivo Opinion" issued by Guatemala's Attorney General recommending the State to declare void certain usufruct contract concluded with the investor concerning infrastructure and other rail assets to provide railway services in Guatemala. |
Decided in favour of investor | Guatemala | United States of America |
155 | 2007 | S&T Oil v. Romania |
Investment: Shareholding and contractual rights under an agreement concluded between the claimant and Romania's privatization authority to take over the privatization of Nitramonia S.A., a large ammonia manufacturing and processing plant. Summary: Claims arising out of contractual disagreements between the parties and the Government's termination of certain privatization agreement concluded with the investor, followed by the cancellation of the company's shareholdings, the taking of its Romanian assets, and the re-privatization of the assets by putting them out to tender. |
Discontinued | Romania | United States of America |
156 | 2007 | TCW v. Dominican Republic |
Investment: Controlling shareholding and 50% owner of a Dominican joint venture created between the Government and a foreign investor to serve as an electricity distribution company. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's alleged wrongful interference with TCW Group's indirect holdings in an electricity joint venture (Empresa Distribuidora de Electricidad del Este, S.A.) by, among other alleged actions and omissions, failing to pay compensation for negotiated tariffs and subsidies. |
Settled | Dominican Republic | United States of America |
157 | 2007 | Trans-Global v. Jordan |
Investment: Rights under a production sharing agreement concluded between a wholly-owned subsidiary of the claimant and Jordan's Natural Resources Authority; capital contributions of over USD 29 million in the petroleum exploration venture. Summary: Claims arising out of claimant's oil exploratory work which confirmed the existence of oil deposits in the Dead Sea and Wadi Araba basin in a designated area of exploration, followed by the Government's alleged systematic campaign to prevent the investor from pursuing any further role in the development of those oil deposits despite an express contractual entitlement to participate. |
Settled | Jordan | United States of America |
158 | 2007 | TS Investment v. Armenia |
Investment: Ownership of a tire factory in Armenia. Summary: Claims arising out of the claimant's investment in a privatized tire plant in Yerevan, Armenia, and the alleged improper Government interference with the implementation of claimant's investment program. |
Decided in favour of State | Armenia | United States of America |
159 | 2006 | Chevron and TexPet v. Ecuador (I) |
Investment: Oil exploration and production rights in Ecuador’s Amazon region through concession contracts concluded with the Government. Summary: Claims arising out of seven breach-of-contract cases filed by Texaco against the Ecuadorian Government in local courts and the alleged egregious delay of all Texaco claims by the Ecuadorian judiciary. |
Decided in favour of investor | Ecuador | United States of America |
160 | 2006 | GL Farms v. Canada |
Investment: Company engaged in the sale of milk and milk products for export to the United States. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged harm to claimants' dairy products business in the territory of Ontario due to milk transportation measures imposed by the Dairy Farmers of Ontario (DFO) and measures taken by Canadian provincial and federal government in furtherance of the DFO measures, including restrictions on the export of milk, and requirement for milk producers in Ontario to obtain a quota authorized under Canada’s supply-management system for dairy products. |
Discontinued | Canada | United States of America |
161 | 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 |
162 | 2006 | Merrill & Ring v. Canada |
Investment: Forestry and land management company. Summary: Claims arising out of the implementation of Canada's log export regime to the investor's timber operations in British Columbia and the requirement that any of its exports be subject to a log surplus testing procedure, among other regulatory measures which allegedly caused loss and damage to it. |
Decided in favour of State | Canada | United States of America |
163 | 2006 | Nations Energy v. Panama |
Investment: Shareholding in a Panamanian company engaged in the generation, distribution and trading of electricity and related activities. Summary: Claims arising out of communications from Panama’s General Revenue Directorate and the Ministry of Economy and Finance that allegedly refused claimants the transfer of certain fiscal tax credits to third parties. |
Decided in favour of State | Panama | United States of America |
164 | 2006 | Occidental v. Ecuador (II) |
Investment: Participation contract for the exploration and exploitation of hydrocarbons. Summary: Claims arising out of the termination (caducidad) of a 1999 participation contract between Occidental Exploration and Production Company and PetroEcuador for the exploration and exploitation of hydrocarbons in Block 15 of the Ecuadorian Amazon region. |
Decided in favour of investor | Ecuador | United States of America |
165 | 2006 | Rail World v. Estonia |
Investment: Rights under an operations contract concluded with the State concerning railway related services. Summary: Claims arising out of Estonia's renationalisation of its national railway, which allegedly reversed a planned privatisation and modified claimants' rail operations contract. |
Settled | Estonia |
Netherlands United States of America |
166 | 2005 | AHCA v. Congo |
Investment: Outstanding invoices issued by the Government, acquired through assignment from a Congolese incorporated company in which the investor held interests. Summary: Claims arising out of an outstanding debt owed by the respondent to the company in which the investor acquired interests related to construction projects conducted in the late 1980s and early 1990s under certain contracts. |
Decided in favour of State | Congo, Democratic Republic of the | United States of America |
167 | 2005 | Asset Recovery v. Argentina |
Investment: Rights under a contract concluded between the claimant and the Province of Mendoza for the collection of debts. Summary: Claims arising out of the adoption of measures by a local government that allegedly wiped out debt and extended payment deadlines under a contract to which the claimant was a party concerning the recovery of debts owned by public banks in the Mendoza province. |
Discontinued | Argentina | United States of America |
168 | 2005 | Bayview v. Mexico |
Investment: Water rights under a 1944 US-Mexico water treaty held by forty six American claimants including seventeen Irrigation Districts, sixteen individuals, two trusts, two limited partnership, two estates, four corporations and three general partnerships. Summary: Claims arising out of Mexico's alleged capture, seizure and diversion of more irrigation water of the Rio Grande River than that to which the country had right under a bilateral US-Mexico treaty, to the benefit and use of Mexican farmers. |
Decided in favour of State | Mexico | United States of America |
169 | 2005 | Cargill v. Mexico |
Investment: Ownership of local company engaged in the manufacture and production of certain fructose syrup used as soft drink sweetener. Summary: Claims arising out of Mexico's 2002 adoption of a tax on beverages containing high fructose corn syrup, that allegedly affected the claimants' investments in the high fructose corn syrup industry in Mexico. |
Decided in favour of investor | Mexico | United States of America |
170 | 2005 | EMELEC v. Ecuador |
Investment: Rights under a concession agreement for the supply of electricity in the city of Guayaquil concluded between the claimant and an organ of the Ecuadorian Government. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation of the investor's premises, bank accounts, and other property located in Ecuadorian territory through a combined military-police operation, followed by local litigation over contractual outstanding amounts. |
Decided in favour of State | Ecuador | United States of America |
171 | 2005 | Noble Energy v. Ecuador |
Investment: Ownership and control of contractual and legal rights through certain concession contract, investment agreement and production sharing contract concerning electricity supply; capital contributions; claims to money and performance having an economic value. Summary: Claims arising out of a series of decrees, acts and omissions of the respondents through which they allegedly altered the economic, regulatory, legal, and contractual framework upon which the claimants had relied in making their investment in Ecuador, including the modification of the mechanism for the payment of invoices which caused a significant increase in unpaid receivables for electricity supply from a power plant in Ecuador. |
Settled | Ecuador | United States of America |
172 | 2004 | ADM v. Mexico |
Investment: Ownership of local company engaged in the manufacture and production of certain fructose syrup used as soft drink sweetener. Summary: Claims arising out of Mexico's 2002 adoption of a tax on beverages containing high fructose corn syrup, that allegedly affected the claimants' investments in the high fructose corn syrup industry in Mexico. |
Decided in favour of investor | Mexico | United States of America |
173 | 2004 | BP v. Argentina |
Investment: Indirect and direct ownership of equity interests in three local companies engaged in oil and gas production in Argentina, holders of a number of hydrocarbon (oil and gas) production concessions, exploration permits and production contracts. Summary: Claims arising out of a series of measures taken in the hydrocarbons and electricity sector by the Government to stem the country's economic crisis of 2001-2002 which allegedly affected the claimants' investments, including the exemption of hydrocarbon exports from export dues, the limitation of royalty rates and the right to freely export hydrocarbons and to transfer funds abroad. |
Settled | Argentina | United States of America |
174 | 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 |
175 | 2004 | CIT Group v. Argentina |
Investment: Portfolio investment held by local subsidiary that had entered into numerous commercial leasing agreements. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged negative impacts that the government's mandatory pesification, undertaken by Argentina in its 2001-2002 economic crisis, had upon hundreds of commercial leasing agreements concluded by claimant's subsidiary and third parties, dismantling the foreign exchange financing component of CIT's investment strategy. |
Settled | Argentina | United States of America |
176 | 2004 | COP v. Canada |
Investment: Capital contributions to develop a television program; application for a television subsidy in Canada. Summary: Claims arising out of Canada's alleged imposition of discriminatory film and television subsidies, as well as employment restrictions on US citizens involved in such productions. |
Discontinued | Canada | United States of America |
177 | 2004 | Corn Products v. Mexico |
Investment: Wholly-owned subsidiary engaged in the large scale production of high fructose corn syrup industry in Mexico. Summary: Claims arising out of Mexico's 2002 adoption of a tax on high fructose corn syrup allegedly aimed at protecting Mexico's domestic sugar producers and excluding high fructose corn syrup from the soft drink sweetener market. |
Decided in favour of investor | Mexico | United States of America |
178 | 2004 | Duke Energy v. Ecuador |
Investment: Ownership interest in local power generation company. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged breaches of several agreements entered into between the parties for electrical power generation and supply to the city of Guayaquil in Ecuador. |
Decided in favour of investor | Ecuador | United States of America |
179 | 2004 | Mobil v. Argentina |
Investment: Rights under gas production concessions in Argentina. Summary: Claims arising out of measures taken by Argentina in response to its 2001-2002 economic crisis that allegedly affected the claimants' investment. |
Decided in favour of investor | Argentina | United States of America |
180 | 2004 | Motorola v. Turkey |
Investment: Direct creditor of loans totalling over USD 2 billion to local company engaged in providing cellular telecommunications network. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s take-over of the telecommunications firm Telsim in which the claimant had invested, and the enactment of legislation ordering the firm's sale and placing Turkey's own financial claims against the telecoms firm ahead of those of the claimant. |
Settled | Türkiye | United States of America |
181 | 2004 | RGA v. Argentina |
Investment: Data not available Summary: Claims arising out of a series of measures taken by the Government to stem the country's economic crisis of 2001-2002 which allegedly affected the claimants' investments in the retirement and pension administration market in Argentina. |
Settled | Argentina | United States of America |
182 | 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 |
183 | 2003 | Azurix v. Argentina (II) |
Investment: Indirect controlling interest in local subsidiary company holder of a concession agreement for water distribution and sewerage treatment services. Summary: Claims arising out of Argentina's alleged interference with the tariff regime applicable to claimant's investment, as well as other alleged breaches of obligations under the relevant concession agreement. |
Discontinued | Argentina | United States of America |
184 | 2003 | Continental Casualty v. Argentina |
Investment: Ownership of insurance company incorporated in Argentina maintaining a portfolio of investment securities. Summary: Claims arising out of a series of decrees and resolutions taken by Argentina in the course of an economic crisis (including restrictions on transfers, rescheduling of cash deposits and pesification of US dollar deposits) that allegedly affected the claimant's investment and frustrated the investor's ability to hedge against the risk of the devaluation of the pesos. |
Decided in favour of investor | Argentina | United States of America |
185 | 2003 | El Paso v. Argentina |
Investment: Indirect and non-controlling shareholding in four Argentine companies involved in the electricity and hydrocarbons industries. Summary: Claims arising out of a series of decrees and resolutions taken by Argentina in the course of an economic crisis (including restrictions on transfers, rescheduling of cash deposits and pesification of US dollar deposits) that allegedly affected the claimant's investment and frustrated the investor's ability to hedge against the risk of the devaluation of the pesos. |
Decided in favour of investor | Argentina | United States of America |
186 | 2003 | MCI v. Ecuador |
Investment: Ownership of a company that was party to a contract for the sale of electricity with Ecuador’s Electricity Institute. Summary: Claims arising out of a series of differences between the investor and Ecuador’s Electricity Institute regarding the execution of a contract concerning an electric power generation project, including the suspension of operations alleging the non-payment of invoices, and the subsequent termination of the contract. |
Decided in favour of State | Ecuador | United States of America |
187 | 2003 | Miminco v. Congo |
Investment: Ownership of local company holding diamond mining concessions. Summary: Claims arising out of the seizure of MIMINCO's diamond mine located in Diboko, confiscating all diamonds, communications equipment and administrative documents at the mine, followed by the seizure of its headquarters by the DRC Office of Illegally Acquired Properties. |
Settled | Congo, Democratic Republic of the | United States of America |
188 | 2003 | Pan American v. Argentina |
Investment: Indirect and direct ownership of equity interests in three local companies engaged in oil and gas production in Argentina, holders of a number of hydrocarbon (oil and gas) production concessions, exploration permits and production contracts. Summary: Claims arising out of a series of measures taken in the hydrocarbons and electricity sector by the Government to stem the country's economic crisis of 2001-2002 which allegedly affected the claimants' investments, including the exemption of hydrocarbon exports from export dues, the limitation of royalty rates and the right to freely export hydrocarbons and to transfer funds abroad. |
Settled | Argentina | United States of America |
189 | 2003 | Pioneer v. Argentina |
Investment: Shareholding in local companies holding hydrocarbon and electricity concessions. Summary: Claims arising out of a series of decrees and resolutions taken by Argentina in the course of an economic crisis (including restrictions on transfers, rescheduling of cash deposits and pesification of US dollar deposits) that allegedly affected the claimant's investment and frustrated the investor's ability to hedge against the risk of the devaluation of the pesos. |
Settled | Argentina | United States of America |
190 | 2003 | Unisys v. Argentina |
Investment: Indirect controlling interest in local company engaged in providing IT services to the Argentine judiciary. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged breaches of a contract for an information‑storage and management project entered into between claimant's local subsidiary and the Argentinean Consejo de la Magistratura, an administrative body that at the time of the measures was in charge of the administration of the Argentine judiciary's assets and contracts. |
Discontinued | Argentina | United States of America |
191 | 2002 | AES v. Argentina |
Investment: Controlling interest in several electricity generation and electricity distribution companies in Argentina. Summary: Claims arising out of Argentina's alleged refusal to apply previously agreed tariff calculation and adjustment mechanisms with regard to claimant's investments. |
Pending | Argentina | United States of America |
192 | 2002 | Ahmonseto v. Egypt |
Investment: Majority shareholding in three textile Egyptian companies. Summary: Claims arising out of the modification by a bank allegedly controlled by Egypt of its credit policy towards the claimants, certain customs duties and taxes assessed against the claimants, and four separate criminal proceedings initiated against them. |
Decided in favour of State | Egypt | United States of America |
193 | 2002 | Champion Trading and Ameritrade v. Egypt |
Investment: Shareholding in a cotton trading and processing company. Summary: Claims arising out of the enactment of Egyptian laws in the mid-1990s privatizing and liberalizing cotton trade. |
Decided in favour of State | Egypt | United States of America |
194 | 2002 | Chemtura v. Canada |
Investment: Agricultural pesticide manufacturing company. Summary: Claims arising out of Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) banning of the agro-chemical lindane on the basis of the chemical’s health and environmental effects. |
Decided in favour of State | Canada | United States of America |
195 | 2002 | Fireman's Fund v. Mexico |
Investment: Ownership of dollar-nominated debentures by insurance company. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged government's facilitation of purchase of debentures denominated in Mexican pesos and owned by Mexican investors, but not facilitating the purchase of debentures denominated in U.S. dollars and owned by Fireman's Fund. |
Decided in favour of State | Mexico | United States of America |
196 | 2002 | Frank v. Mexico |
Investment: Ownership of beachfront property in Mexico. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation of a beachfront property belonging to the investor in Mexico's Baja California area. |
Discontinued | Mexico | United States of America |
197 | 2002 | GAMI v. Mexico |
Investment: Minority shareholding in a Mexican holding company, owner of five sugar mills. Summary: Claims arising out of the issuance of a decree for the stated purpose of revitalizing the Mexican sugar industry under which Mexican authorities expropriated sugar mills owned by its local subsidiaries. |
Decided in favour of State | Mexico | United States of America |
198 | 2002 | IBM v. Ecuador |
Investment: Rights under an informatics services concession contract. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged lack of payment of monies to the investor's wholly-owned subsidiary under a concession contract entered into with the Ecuadorian Ministry of Finances and Public Credit. |
Settled | Ecuador | United States of America |
199 | 2002 | LG&E v. Argentina |
Investment: Rights under license agreements for gas distribution entered into with the Government through three local subsidiaries. Summary: Claims arising out of certain measures adopted by Argentina, in particular the adoption of the Emergency Law of 2002, which modified the regulatory environment under which the claimants invested in three natural gas distribution enterprises in Argentina. |
Decided in favour of investor | Argentina | United States of America |
200 | 2002 | Occidental v. Ecuador (I) |
Investment: Rights under a participation contract for the exploration and exploitation of hydrocarbons. Summary: Claims arising out of resolutions issued by the Ecuadorian tax authority denying applications for VAT refunds by Occidental, and requiring the return of the amounts previously reimbursed in connection with a participation contract entered into by the claimant with Petroecuador, a State-owned corporation of Ecuador, to undertake oil exploration and production in Ecuador. |
Decided in favour of investor | Ecuador | United States of America |
201 | 2002 | PSEG v. Turkey |
Investment: Rights under a concession agreement for the construction of a thermal power plant; assets of project company, including associated intangible property, licenses and permits. Summary: Claims arising out of several disagreements concerning a concession contract entered into with the government for the construction of an agnite-fired thermal power plant, as well as subsequent measures adopted by the respondent such as preventing the claimant from obtaining certain necessary treasury guarantee for the project. |
Decided in favour of investor | Türkiye | United States of America |
202 | 2002 | Sempra v. Argentina |
Investment: Equity interest in two Argentinean gas distribution companies. Summary: Claims arising out of Argentina's suspension of the licensee companies' tariff increases based on the US producer price index and the subsequent pesification of these tariffs. |
Decided in favour of investor | Argentina | United States of America |
203 | 2001 | Adams v. Mexico |
Investment: Acquisition of residential housing and associated infrastructure improvements. Summary: Claims arising out of the enforcement of a judicial decision ordering the return of certain land to its original owners, thus requiring the eviction of residents of a tourist/residential development built upon such land, many of whom were Americans. |
Discontinued | Mexico | United States of America |
204 | 2001 | AIG v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Ownership and/or direct control of an investment vehicle company, a financing company and a joint venture established to invest in certain real estate project. Summary: Claims arising out of the cancellation of a project for the development of a residential housing complex, and the subsequent transfer of the project's property to the City of Almaty without compensation, on the basis that the land concerned was required for a national arboretum. |
Decided in favour of investor | Kazakhstan | United States of America |
205 | 2001 | Azurix v. Argentina (I) |
Investment: Indirect controlling interest in local subsidiary that had a concession agreement for water distribution and sewerage treatment services. Summary: Claims arising out of Argentina's alleged interference with the tariff regime applicable to claimant's investment, as well as other alleged breaches of obligations under a water concession agreement. |
Decided in favour of investor | Argentina | United States of America |
206 | 2001 | CCL Oil v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Concession agreement for use and management of certain State's shareholding. Summary: Claims arising out of the termination of a concession agreement for use and management of the State's shareholding in an oil refinery. |
Decided in favour of State | Kazakhstan | United States of America |
207 | 2001 | CMS v. Argentina |
Investment: Shareholding in local subsidiary involved in gas transportation activities. Summary: Claims arising out of Argentina's suspension/termination of the claimant right to calculate tariffs in US dollars and to make inflation adjustments. |
Decided in favour of investor | Argentina | United States of America |