Investment Dispute Settlement Navigator

Concluded original arbitration proceedings:

About

Open this in NEW TAB
ISDS data set in excel format (as of 31 December 2023)

ISDS Navigator

The UNCTAD Investment Dispute Settlement Navigator – the ISDS Navigator – is maintained by UNCTAD’s IIA Section. The ISDS Navigator contains information about known international arbitration cases initiated by investors against States pursuant to international investment agreements (IIAs). Such arbitrations are also referred to as treaty-based investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) cases.

Please cite as: UNCTAD, Investment Dispute Settlement Navigator, available at https://investmentpolicy.unctad.org/investment-dispute-settlement

UNCTAD's Work Programme on International Investment Agreements (IIAs) actively assists policymakers, government officials and other IIA stakeholders to reform IIAs with a view to making them more conducive to sustainable development and inclusive growth.

International investment rulemaking is taking place at the bilateral, regional, interregional and multilateral levels. It requires policymakers, negotiators, civil society and other stakeholders to be well informed about foreign direct investment, international investment agreements (IIAs) and their impact on sustainable development.

Main goals of UNCTAD’s Work Programme on IIAs

• Reform the international investment agreements (IIAs) regime to enhance its sustainable development dimension,

• Provide comprehensive analysis on key issues arising from the complexity of the international investment regime,

• Develop a wide range of tools to support the formulation of more balanced international investment policies.

The three pillars of activities

• Research and policy analysis: monitoring trends, identifying key emerging issues and providing cutting-edge knowledge on IIAs from a sustainable development perspective,

• Technical assistance: delivering trainings, seminars and workshops; conducting IIA and model BIT reviews; offering ad-hoc advice to strengthen the capacity of beneficiaries in handling the complexities of the IIA regime,

• Intergovernmental consensus-building: exchanging and sharing best practices and experience with the view to fostering global investment governance.

For further information, please contact us via the online contact form.
Methodology

Open this in NEW TAB

Disclaimer

The ISDS Navigator includes information about publicly known IIA-based international investor-State arbitration proceedings. As some proceedings (or certain aspects of proceedings) remain confidential, the information contained in the Navigator cannot be deemed exhaustive.

While every effort is made to keep the information up to date and complete, the material is provided without any guarantees or warranties as to its accuracy or completeness. UNCTAD assumes no responsibility for eventual errors or omissions in these data.

We welcome any additional information or clarifications on specific cases as well as suggestions to improve the Navigator. Please contact us using the online contact form.

Cases included in the Navigator

• an international arbitration between an investor and a State;

• fully or partially based on an IIA, such as a bilateral investment treaty or the investment chapter of a free trade agreement (not included are investor-State disputes that are solely based on contracts or on domestic investment legislation);

• submitted to arbitration through a notice of arbitration or a request for arbitration, and upon registration of such request if applicable (not included are cases where a disputing party has only notified the other party of the existence of a dispute or signalled its intention to submit a claim, but has not yet commenced the arbitration).

Sources of information and frequency of updating

The information included in the Navigator is collected from publicly available sources. Primary sources (i.e. official documents relating to the case and information provided by the administering institutions) are the main and preferred source of information. Secondary sources, such as specialized reporting services and other sources deemed reliable, are used to supplement primary sources and/or obtain case information otherwise unavailable.
The Navigator is updated on a regular, typically biannual, basis. The date of the last update is displayed on the Navigator’s home page.

Methodological notes for the recording of data

Full case name
The full case name is recorded as it appears in the official case documents and as it is registered at the administering institution if applicable (listing the claimants in alphabetical order). If there are more than five claimants in the case, the names of all claimants can be replaced by the name of the first three claimants followed by the words “and others”.

Short case name
The short case name is ascribed by UNCTAD. Typically it is the first word of a corporate claimant’s name, an abbreviation of the corporate claimant’s name, or the last name of a natural-person claimant “v.” the short version of the respondent State’s name.

If the Navigator includes more than one case with the exact same name, then “(I)” is added to the case name of the earlier case, and a “(II)”, “(III)”, etc. is added to the name of each subsequent case.

Year of initiation
This is the year in which the notice of arbitration / request for arbitration was submitted by the claimant. For arbitrations brought under the ICSID Convention Arbitration Rules or ICSID Additional Facilities (AF) Rules, the year in which the claim was registered by ICSID is used.

Applicable IIA
This is the IIA(s) pursuant to which the claimant initiated the arbitral proceedings.

Arbitral rules
These are the arbitral rules in accordance with which the proceedings are conducted. Proceedings that are not subject to any existing set of arbitral rules, i.e. where the arbitral tribunal determines procedural rules, are marked “None (ad hoc)”.

Administering institution
This is the institution that provides administrative support for the arbitral proceedings. When the proceedings are subject to arbitral rules of a certain arbitral institution (e.g. SCC or ICC), the relevant institution administers that case. In ad hoc arbitrations or those that are subject to non-institutional arbitral rules (e.g. UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules), the parties may request any arbitral institution to administer their case (e.g. PCA). Proceedings may also be conducted without being administered by any institution.

Common abbreviations for administering institutions:

• CRCICA: Cairo Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration
• ICC: International Chamber of Commerce (International Court of Arbitration)
• ICSID: International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes
• LCIA: London Court of International Arbitration
• MCCI: Moscow Chamber of Commerce and Industry
• PCA: Permanent Court of Arbitration
• SCC: Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (Arbitration Institute)

Details of investment and summary of the dispute
The details of investment are presented as argued by the claimant, unless otherwise expressly identified by an arbitral tribunal in its decisions or awards.

The summary of the dispute describes in very general terms the conduct allegedly in breach of IIA obligations as argued by the claimant (non-exhaustive).

Economic sector and subsector
This refers to the economic sector to which the investment at issue allegedly belongs. The structure of economic activities follows the International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities, Rev.4 (UN ISIC Rev.4).

Status/Outcome of original proceedings
This refers to the current status of the original arbitration proceedings.

• Decided in favour of State: the tribunal dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction or found that the respondent State has not committed any breach of the applicable IIA.

• Decided in favour of investor: the tribunal found that the respondent State committed one or more breaches of the applicable IIA and awarded monetary compensation or non-pecuniary relief to the claimant investor.

• Decided in favour of neither party (liability found but no damages awarded): the arbitral tribunal found that the respondent State committed one or more breaches of the applicable IIA but did not award monetary compensation or non-pecuniary relief to the claimant investor.

• Settled: the disputing parties settled the case and the arbitral proceedings were discontinued for that reason.

• Discontinued: the arbitration was discontinued for any reason other than due to a (known) settlement. This includes discontinuance as a result of non-payment of arbitration fees, in order to pursue litigation in another forum, or for any other reason (including for unknown reasons).

• Pending: the arbitration proceedings are pending. A case remains pending if any of the following elements remain to be decided: jurisdiction, liability (merits), compensation. The case remains pending, for instance, if a State is found to have breached one or more IIA obligations (liability) but no award on damages has been issued yet.

Additional notes:

• The Navigator only records treaty-based disputes or treaty-based aspects of "mixed" disputes. In treaty-based cases that are simultaneously contract-based or based on national investment law ("mixed" disputes), a case is deemed concluded (for purposes of the Navigator) if the tribunal dismissed the case on jurisdiction or finds no breach of the IIA, even if it proceeds to adjudicate the contract- or statutory-based claims.

• Cases in which a final award has been rendered but which are later subject to follow-on (post-award) proceedings (e.g. ICSID annulment proceedings or domestic judicial review), are marked according to the outcome of the original arbitral proceeding (i.e. not as “Pending”).

Arbitral decisions rendered
These are decisions rendered by an arbitral tribunal. Included are those decisions that concern the substance of the case and affect the final outcome. In particular, these include decisions (awards) on jurisdictional issues, liability (merits) and damages, including arbitrators’ individual opinions where these were issued. Discontinuance orders and settlement agreements are also recorded if such information is available.

Not included are any other (supplementary) arbitral decisions, e.g. concerning provisional measures or decisions regarding requests for disqualification of arbitrators. Similarly, procedural orders issued by arbitral tribunals are not included. To access a full list of documentation available with respect to a case, users are invited to use (i) the link to the case page on http://italaw.com, and/or (ii) links to the websites of governments and/or arbitral institutions provided in the “Additional information” section.

Amounts claimed and awarded
Amount claimed refers to the amount of monetary compensation claimed by the investor, not including interest, legal costs or costs of arbitration.

Amount awarded refers to the amount of monetary compensation awarded by the arbitral tribunal to the claimant, not including interest, legal costs or costs of arbitration.

For proceedings that end in a settlement, the amount of compensation that the State agreed to pay to the claimant under the terms of settlement (if known) is recorded in this section.

Amounts are recorded in the currency used by the claimant/tribunal. The list of currencies in the Navigator follows the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 4217 code list.

To enable comparisons between cases, all amounts are also converted to US dollars. For the purposes of such conversion, the OANDA Historical Currency Converter is being used; the date of conversion is the date of the document or other source from which the information was obtained (e.g. the date in which the request for arbitration containing this amount was submitted or the date of the final award).

Whenever possible, information about amounts claimed and awarded is obtained from primary sources such as the arbitration documents. Otherwise, it is derived from other publicly available sources that are deemed reliable. In some cases, the approximate amount may be recorded to give a broad indication of the dispute’s magnitude. As a general rule, a rounded figure (to the nearest hundred thousand) of the amount claimed or awarded is provided.

If the claimant provides more than one valuation of damages claimed, the highest of these amounts is recorded.

IIA breaches alleged and found
Information about breaches alleged is primarily derived from the claimant’s request of arbitration, claimant’s memorials and/or arbitral decisions. When the relevant case documentation is not publicly available, information about breaches alleged may be obtained from other public sources that are deemed reliable.

Information about breaches found is primarily derived from the arbitral decisions. When the relevant decision is not publicly available, information about breaches found may be obtained from other public sources that are deemed reliable.

Claims concerning expropriation are classified as “direct” or “indirect” according to the characterisation made by the claimant and/or the tribunal. Whenever a claimant or the tribunal refer to “expropriation”, without distinguishing between “direct” or “indirect”, such distinction is made on the basis of the factual background of the case and the context of the claimant’s claims and tribunal’s findings.

Composition of tribunal
These are individuals who serve as members of the arbitral tribunal adjudicating the dispute (arbitrators).

The disputing party (i.e. claimant or respondent) that appointed a particular arbitrator is also recorded insofar as information is available. Instances where the respondent failed to appoint an arbitrator, and the latter was appointed by an “appointing authority”, are not recorded separately (i.e. both types of appointment are recorded under “Appointed by / designated to Respondent” without further distinction).

In case an arbitrator has been replaced by another individual (e.g. as a result of resignation, disqualification or passing away), the names of both the previous and subsequent arbitrator are recorded.

Follow-on (post-award) proceedings
Follow-on (post-award) proceedings include three types of legal proceedings:

• ICSID annulment proceedings;

• Judicial review by national courts (set-aside proceedings); and

• ICSID resubmission proceedings.

Initiation of a follow-on proceeding by either disputing party does not affect the field “Case Status/Outcome” of the original proceeding, until the follow-on proceeding is completed. For example, in a case where a final award has been rendered but it is later subject to a follow-on proceeding (e.g. ICSID annulment proceeding), the status of the case is marked according to the outcome of the original arbitral proceeding (i.e. not as “Pending”).

Decisions, judgments and/or awards rendered in the course of follow-on (post-award) proceedings, as well as any individual opinions appended to them, are recorded.

The composition of the ICSID ad hoc committees that adjudicate requests for annulment under the ICSID Convention is recorded.

Link to Italaw’s case page
The Italaw.com portal offers a wide collection of case documentation for many investor-State disputes. It makes available not only the main arbitral decisions, but also procedural orders, parties’ submissions, expert opinions and other types of documents.

A link to the relevant case page at http://italaw.com is provided where such page is available, so that users could browse all documents relating to the case at hand.

Additional information
This section provides links to sources of information used for gathering data for the case at hand or otherwise relevant to that case. These may include links to websites of arbitral/administering institutions, governments, international organisations, specialised reporting services (including subscription-based), media and other resources.

Home >
Investment Dispute Settlement Navigator

Advanced Search

Case name and number

Results: 412

Year

Results: 0

Countries

Results: 149

Economic sector and subsector

Results: 0

Applicable IIA

Results: 0

Arbitral rules and administering institution

Results: 0

Arbitrators and annulment committee members

Results: 0

Amount of compensation (USD or USD equivalent)

Results: 0

Breaches of IIA provisions alleged and found

Results: 0

Follow-on proceedings

Results: 0

Case name

Case number

Clear selection

NO.	Year of initiation	Short case name	Full case name	Applicable IIA	Arbitral rules	Administering institution	Summary	Details of investment	Outcome of original proceedings	Respondent State	Home State of investor	Economic sector	Economic subsector	Arbitrators	Amount claimed	Amount awarded (or settled for)	Breaches alleged	Breaches found	Decisions	Individual opinions	Follow-on proceeding type	Follow-on proceeding status	Follow-on decisions	Follow-on individual opinions	ICSID annulment committee members
1	2024	Spentech Engineering v. United Arab Emirates	Spentech Engineering Limited v. United Arab Emirates (ICSID Case No. ARB/24/16)	Kenya - United Arab Emirates BIT (2014)	ICSID	ICSID	Investment: Contracts for several construction projects signed with the Embassy of the United Arab Emirates in Mogadishu, including army barracks and a hospital. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged misconduct by government officials related to construction contracts between the claimant and the Embassy of the United Arab Emirates in Mogadishu.	Contracts for several construction projects signed with the Embassy of the United Arab Emirates in Mogadishu, including army barracks and a hospital.	Decided in favour of State	United Arab Emirates	Kenya	Tertiary: F - Construction	41 - Construction of buildings	Malintoppi, L. - President Ojo, C. A. - Claimant Greenwood, C. - Respondent	Data not available	Data not available	Direct expropriation Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims Full protection and security, or similar National treatment Most-favoured nation treatment Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures	None - jurisdiction declined	Award dated 28 July 2025	None	Data not available	Data not available	Data not available	Data not available	Data not available
2	2022	Halevi v. Czechia	Asael Halevi v. Czech Republic (PCA Case No. 2022-33)	Czech Republic - Israel BIT (1997)	UNCITRAL	PCA	Investment: Shareholding in a land development project in Prague-Ďáblice. Summary: Claims arising out of a court ruling which allegedly resulted in the expropriation of land plots intended for a development project in which the claimant had invested.	Shareholding in a land development project in Prague-Ďáblice.	Decided in favour of State	Czechia	Israel	Tertiary: L - Real estate activities	68 - Real estate activities	Reed, L. - President Reichert, K. - Claimant Wordsworth, S. - Respondent	165.00 mln CZK (6.90 mln USD)	Data not available	Direct expropriation Indirect expropriation Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims Full protection and security, or similar	None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage	Final Award dated 12 December 2024	None	None	None	None	None	None
3	2022	Westmoreland v. Canada (III)	Westmoreland Coal Company v. Canada (III) (ICSID Case No. UNCT/23/2)	NAFTA (1992) USMCA (2018)	UNCITRAL	ICSID	Investment: Ownership of several 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.	Ownership of several coal mines servicing adjacent power plants through mine-mouth operations in the Province of Alberta, Canada.	Decided in favour of State	Canada	United States of America	Primary: B - Mining and quarrying	5 - Mining of coal and lignite	Kaufmann-Kohler, G. - President Shore, L. - Claimant Levine, J. - Respondent	Data not available	Data not available	Indirect expropriation Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims National treatment	None - jurisdiction declined	Award dated 17 December 2024	None	None	None	None	None	None
4	2021	Discovery Global v. Slovakia	Discovery Global LLC v. Slovak Republic (ICSID Case No. ARB/21/51)	Slovakia - United States BIT (1991)	ICSID	ICSID	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.	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.	Decided in favour of State	Slovakia	United States of America	Primary: B - Mining and quarrying	6 - Extraction of crude petroleum and natural gas	Kaufmann-Kohler, G. - President Drymer, S. L. - Claimant Sands, P. - Respondent	2110.00 mln USD	Data not available	Indirect expropriation Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures Other	None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage	Award dated 17 January 2025	None	None	None	None	None	None
5	2021	Enel v. Türkiye	Enel, S.p.A. v. Republic of Türkiye (ICSID Case No. ARB/21/61)	Italy - Turkey BIT (1995)	ICSID	ICSID	Investment: Investments in a renewable energy generation enterprise. Summary: Claims arising out of the energy market regulatory authority’s allegedly unlawful cancellation of the claimant’s pre-licence for a solar power plant.	Investments in a renewable energy generation enterprise.	Decided in favour of State	Türkiye	Italy	Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply	35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply	Reinisch, A. - President Rowley, J. W. - Claimant Stern, B. - Respondent	30.00 mln USD	Data not available	Data not available	None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage	Award dated 22 July 2025	None	None	None	None	None	None
6	2021	Everyway v. Ghana	Beijing Everyway Traffic & Lighting Tech. Co., Ltd v. Republic of Ghana (PCA Case No. 2021-15)	China - Ghana BIT (1989)	UNCITRAL	PCA	Investment: Contract with the Ministry of Roads and Highways for the engineering and installation of a traffic management system in Accra. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s cancellation of a contract with the claimant to install an intelligent traffic management system, including alleged non-payment for works conducted by the claimant.	Contract with the Ministry of Roads and Highways for the engineering and installation of a traffic management system in Accra.	Decided in favour of State	Ghana	China	Tertiary: F - Construction	43 - Specialized construction activities	Brekoulakis, S. - President Rajah, V. K. - Claimant Oppong, R. - Respondent	55.00 mln USD	Data not available	Indirect expropriation Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims Umbrella clause Direct expropriation Most-favoured nation treatment	None - jurisdiction declined	Final Award on Jurisdiction (Save as to Costs) dated 30 January 2023	None	None	None	None	None	None
7	2021	Finetis v. Morocco	Finetis SARL and Finetis Maroc SA v. Kingdom of Morocco (ICSID Case No. ARB/21/44)	France - Morocco BIT (1996)	ICSID	ICSID	Investment: Investments in the construction and operation of a high-speed telecommunications infrastructure. Summary:	Investments in the construction and operation of a high-speed telecommunications infrastructure.	Decided in favour of State	Morocco	France	Tertiary: J - Information and communication	61 - Telecommunications	Hanotiau, B. - President Mantilla-Serrano, F. - Claimant Boisson de Chazournes, L. - Respondent	Data not available	Data not available	Data not available	Data not available	Award dated 4 October 2024	None	None	None	None	None	None
8	2021	Ivicom v. Albania	Ivicom Holding GmbH v. Republic of Albania (SCC Case No. 2021/155)	The Energy Charter Treaty (1994)	SCC	SCC	Investment: Summary:		Decided in favour of State	Albania	Austria	Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply	35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply	Paulsson, J. - President Busse, D. - Claimant Kalicki, J. E. - Respondent	Data not available	Data not available	Data not available	Data not available	Award dated 26 June 2024	None	None	None	None	None	None
9	2021	Kaloti v. Peru	Kaloti Metals & Logistics, LLC v. Republic of Peru (ICSID Case No. ARB/21/29)	Peru - United States FTA (2006)	ICSID	ICSID	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.	Investments in gold trading and export activities.	Decided in favour of State	Peru	United States of America	Tertiary: G - Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles	46 - Wholesale trade, except of motor vehicles and motorcycles	McRae, D. M. - President Fernández Rozas, J. C. - Claimant Knieper, R. - Respondent	75.00 mln USD	Data not available	Indirect expropriation Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims Full protection and security, or similar National treatment	None - jurisdiction declined	Award dated 14 May 2024 (English) Award dated 14 May 2024 (Spanish)	None	None	None	None	None	None
10	2021	Pavilniu and Modus v. Belarus	UAB Pavilniu saules slenis 14 and UAB Modus grupe v. Republic of Belarus (ICSID Case No. ARB/21/2)	Belarus - Lithuania BIT (1999)	ICSID	ICSID	Investment: Investment in a hotel construction project near the Minsk national airport. Summary:	Investment in a hotel construction project near the Minsk national airport.	Decided in favour of State	Belarus	Lithuania	Tertiary: F - Construction Tertiary: I - Accommodation and food service activities	41 - Construction of buildings 55 - Accommodation	Bull, C. - President Tonova, S. - Claimant Malintoppi, L. - Respondent	9.00 mln USD	Data not available	Data not available	None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage	Award dated 5 December 2023	Separate Opinion by Sylvia Tonova	None	None	None	None	None
11	2021	TC Energy and TransCanada v. USA (II)	TC Energy Corporation and TransCanada Pipelines Limited v. United States of America (II) (ICSID Case No. ARB/21/63)	NAFTA (1992) USMCA (2018)	ICSID	ICSID	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).	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.	Decided in favour of State	United States of America	Canada	Tertiary: H - Transportation and storage Tertiary: F - Construction	49 - Land transport and transport via pipelines 42 - Civil engineering	Mourre, A. - President Álvarez, H. C. - Claimant Crook, J. R. - Respondent	15000.00 mln USD	Data not available	Indirect expropriation Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims Full protection and security, or similar National treatment Most-favoured nation treatment	None - jurisdiction declined	Award dated 12 July 2024	Dissenting Opinion of Henri C. Alvarez	None	None	None	None	None
12	2021	WM Mining v. Mongolia	WM Mining Company, LLC v. Mongolia (ICSID Case No. ARB/21/8)	Mongolia - United States BIT (1994)	ICSID	ICSID	Investment: Indirect shareholding in local company Ikh Tokhoirol LLC with mining licences for the Big Bend gold mining project in Mongolia. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s measures related to the implementation of a law enacted in 2009 which prohibited mining within 200 meters of rivers (the “River Law”), allegedly resulting in the removal of a substantial area from the pre-existing mining licences held by Ikh Tokhoirol.	Indirect shareholding in local company Ikh Tokhoirol LLC with mining licences for the Big Bend gold mining project in Mongolia.	Decided in favour of State	Mongolia	United States of America	Primary: B - Mining and quarrying	7 - Mining of metal ores	Zuleta, E. - President Drymer, S. L. - Claimant van den Berg, A. J. - Respondent	42.60 mln USD	Data not available	Direct expropriation Indirect expropriation Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims National treatment	None - jurisdiction declined	Award dated 29 August 2024	None	None	None	None	None	None
13	2020	AFC v. Colombia	AFC Investment Solutions S.L. v. Republic of Colombia (ICSID Case No. ARB/20/16)	Colombia - Spain BIT (2005)	ICSID	ICSID	Investment: Investments in Internacional Compañía de Financiamiento S.A. Summary: Claims arising out of the forced liquidation of Internacional Compañía de Financiamiento S.A. ordered by Colombia’s financial regulatory authority (Superintendencia Financiera de Colombia) in 2015.	Investments in Internacional Compañía de Financiamiento S.A.	Decided in favour of State	Colombia	Spain	Tertiary: K - Financial and insurance activities	64 - Financial service activities, except insurance and pension funding	Sepúlveda Amor, B. - President Sacco, S. - Claimant Jiménez Figueres, D. - Respondent	Data not available	Data not available	Data not available	None - jurisdiction declined	Award dated 24 February 2022 (Spanish)	None	None	None	None	None	None
14	2020	AHG v. Iraq	AHG Industry GmbH & Co. KG v. Republic of Iraq (ICSID Case No. ARB/20/21)	EU - Iraq Cooperation Agreement (2012)	ICSID	ICSID	Investment: Investments in a cement factory in Kirkuk through 51% share in a local company performing a rehabilitation and operation contract. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged takeover and a series of other government actions related to a cement factory in Kirkuk in which the claimant had invested based on a rehabilitation and operation contract signed with a state-owned company in 2008.	Investments in a cement factory in Kirkuk through 51% share in a local company performing a rehabilitation and operation contract.	Decided in favour of State	Iraq	Germany	Secondary: C - Manufacturing	23 - Manufacture of other non-metallic mineral products	Banifatemi, Y. - President Reed, L. - Claimant Al-Khasawneh, A. S. - Respondent	1000.00 mln USD	Data not available	Data not available	None - jurisdiction declined	Award on the Respondent's Application Under ICSID Rule 41(5) dated 30 September 2022	None	ICSID annulment proceedings	Discontinued (ICSID annulment proceedings)	Order taking note of the discontinuance of the proceeding dated 13 January 2025 (ICSID annulment proceedings)	None	Wallgren-Lindholm, C. - President Cicchetti, T. M. - Member Cooper-Rousseau, B. - Member
15	2020	Amorrortu v. Peru (I)	Bacilio Amorrortu v. The Republic of Peru (I) (PCA Case No. 2020-11)	Peru - United States FTA (2006)	UNCITRAL	PCA	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.	Investments in Baspetrol S.A.C., a company operating in the oil and gas field.	Decided in favour of State	Peru	United States of America	Primary: B - Mining and quarrying	9 - Mining support service activities	Binnie, I. - President Hanotiau, B. - Claimant Landau, T. - Respondent	96.90 mln USD	Data not available	Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims	None - jurisdiction declined	Partial Award on Jurisdiction dated 5 August 2022 (English) Partial Award on Jurisdiction dated 5 August 2022 (Spanish) Final Award on Costs dated 25 October 2022 (English) Final Award on Costs dated 25 October 2022 (Spanish)	None	Judicial review by national courts	Pending (Judicial review by national courts)	None	None	None
16	2020	AsiaPhos and Norwest v. China	AsiaPhos Limited and Norwest Chemicals Pte Ltd v. People’s Republic of China (ICSID Case No. ADM/21/1)	China - Singapore BIT (1985)	Ad hoc	ICSID	Investment: Investments in three phosphate mines in the Sichuan province. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged expropriation of the claimants’ three phosphate mines in the Sichuan province, including through government directives to vacate and cease operations at two mining operations and the non-renewal of mining and exploration licences at another.	Investments in three phosphate mines in the Sichuan province.	Decided in favour of State	China	Singapore	Primary: B - Mining and quarrying	8 - Other mining and quarrying	Sachs, K. - President Alexandrov, S. A. - Claimant van den Berg, A. J. - Respondent	170.00 mln USD	Data not available	Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims Full protection and security, or similar Most-favoured nation treatment Umbrella clause Indirect expropriation	None - jurisdiction declined	Award dated 16 February 2023	Dissenting Opinion by Stanimir A. Alexandrov	Judicial review by national courts	Award/decision upheld (Judicial review by national courts)	Judgment of the Swiss Federal Tribunal dated 11 January 2024 (Judicial review by national courts)	None	None
17	2020	BRIF v. Serbia	BRIF TRES d.o.o. Beograd and BRIF-TC d.o.o. Beograd v. Republic of Serbia (ICSID Case No. ARB/20/12)	BLEU (Belgium-Luxembourg Economic Union) - Serbia BIT (2004)	ICSID	ICSID	Investment: Investments in a project to construct a shopping mall in Belgrade on land held under a long-term lease agreement signed with the Government of Serbia. Summary: Claims arising out of Serbian authorities’ acts and omissions related to a dispute with a third party over the ownership of land leased to the claimants in 2004 following a tender process. According to the claimants, this stalled their project to construct a shopping center in Belgrade.	Investments in a project to construct a shopping mall in Belgrade on land held under a long-term lease agreement signed with the Government of Serbia.	Decided in favour of State	Serbia	Luxembourg	Tertiary: F - Construction	41 - Construction of buildings	Derains, Y. - President Haridi, S. A. - Claimant Stern, B. - Respondent	143.60 mln EUR (156.50 mln USD)	Data not available	Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims Full protection and security, or similar Indirect expropriation Umbrella clause	None - jurisdiction declined	Award dated 30 January 2023	Dissenting Opinion by Samaa Haridi	ICSID annulment proceedings	Discontinued (ICSID annulment proceedings)	Order taking note of the discontinuance of the proceeding pursuant to ICSID Administrative and Financial Regulation 16(2)(c) dated 22 December 2023 (ICSID annulment proceedings)	None	Pinto, M. - President Ohara, Y. - Member Ragnwaldh, J. - Member
18	2020	Campos de Pesé v. Panama	Campos de Pesé, S.A. v. Republic of Panama (ICSID Case No. ARB/20/19)	Italy - Panama BIT (2009)	ICSID	ICSID	Investment: Investments in bioethanol production, land and facilities. Summary: Claims arising out of regulatory changes adopted by the Government that allegedly caused the claimant’s bioethanol business to cease operations, as well as environmental pollution charges brought against the claimant and the imposition of penalties.	Investments in bioethanol production, land and facilities.	Decided in favour of State	Panama	Italy	Secondary: C - Manufacturing	20 - Manufacture of chemicals and chemical products	Zuleta, E. - President Grigera Naón, H. A. - Claimant Stern, B. - Respondent	100.00 mln USD	Data not available	Indirect expropriation Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims Full protection and security, or similar Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures	None - jurisdiction declined	Award dated 1 March 2024	None	None	None	None	None	None
19	2020	Consorcio Cementero and others v. Bolivia	Consorcio Cementero del Sur S.A., Yura Inversiones Bolivia S.A., Grupo de Inversiones Gloria Bolivia S.A., Sociedad Boliviana de Cemento S.A. v. Plurinational State of Bolivia (PCA Case No. 2020-47)	Bolivia, Plurinational State of - Peru BIT (1993)	UNCITRAL	PCA	Investment: Majority shareholding in Sociedad Boliviana de Cementos (“Soboce”), which held a 33.34% share in Fábrica Nacional de Cemento S.A. (“Fancesa”). Summary: Claims arising out of a Government decree in 2010 nationalizing Soboce’s shareholding of 33.34 per cent in Fancesa, a national cement company.	Majority shareholding in Sociedad Boliviana de Cementos (“Soboce”), which held a 33.34% share in Fábrica Nacional de Cemento S.A. (“Fancesa”).	Decided in favour of State	Bolivia, Plurinational State of	Peru	Secondary: C - Manufacturing	23 - Manufacture of other non-metallic mineral products	Fernández Arroyo, D. P. - President Garibaldi, O. M. - Claimant Viñuales, J. E. - Respondent	269.40 mln USD	Data not available	Data not available	None - jurisdiction declined	Award on Jurisdiction dated 27 November 2023	None	None	None	None	None	None
20	2020	Durres and others v. Albania	Durres Kurum Shipping SH. P.K., Durres Container Terminal SH.A, Metal Commodities Foreign Trade Corp. and Altberg Developments LP v. Republic of Albania (ICSID Case No. ARB/20/37)	Albania - United Kingdom BIT (1994) Albania - United States BIT (1995)	ICSID	ICSID	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.	Interests in a joint venture holding a concession contract for the management, operation and maintenance of a container terminal at the port of Durres.	Decided in favour of State	Albania	United Kingdom United States of America	Tertiary: H - Transportation and storage Tertiary: H - Transportation and storage	50 - Water transport 52 - Warehousing and support activities for transportation	Mantilla-Serrano, F. - Claimant Sands, P. - Respondent Scherer, M. (**) - President	63.40 mln USD	Data not available	Indirect expropriation Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims Full protection and security, or similar	None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage	Final Award dated 26 July 2024	None	None	None	None	None	None
21	2020	Encavis and others v. Italy	Encavis AG, Fano Solar 1 S.r.l., DE Stern 10 S.r.l. and others v. Italian Republic (ICSID Case No. ARB/20/39)	The Energy Charter Treaty (1994)	ICSID	ICSID	Investment: Investments in photovoltaic power plants. Summary: Claims arising out of a series of governmental decrees to cut tariff incentives for some solar power projects.	Investments in photovoltaic power plants.	Decided in favour of State	Italy	Germany	Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply	35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply	Fernández-Armesto, J. - President Miles, W. J. - Claimant Mourre, A. - Respondent	Data not available	Data not available	Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims Umbrella clause Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures Other	None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage	Award dated 11 March 2024	None	None	None	None	None	None
22	2020	Fin.Doc and others v. Romania	Fin.Doc S.r.l., Domenica Gazineo, En.Doc S.r.l. and others v. Romania (ICSID Case No. ARB/20/35)	The Energy Charter Treaty (1994)	ICSID	ICSID	Investment: Investments in photovoltaic power plants in Romania. Summary: Claims arising out of certain changes to Romania’s incentive scheme for investments in the renewable energy sector.	Investments in photovoltaic power plants in Romania.	Decided in favour of State	Romania	Cyprus Czechia Germany Greece Italy Luxembourg Türkiye	Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply	35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply	Spigelman, J. - Claimant McRae, D. M. - Respondent Reed, L. - President	243.40 mln EUR (250.70 mln USD)	Data not available	Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims	None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage	Award dated 16 January 2025	None	None	None	None	None	None
23	2020	Freeport-McMoRan v. Peru	Freeport-McMoRan Inc. v. Republic of Peru (ICSID Case No. ARB/20/8)	Peru - United States FTA (2006)	ICSID	ICSID	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.	Shareholding of 54 per cent in Sociedad Minera Cerro Verde S.A.A. with a mining concession for a copper deposit southwest of Arequipa.	Decided in favour of State	Peru	United States of America	Primary: B - Mining and quarrying	7 - Mining of metal ores	Tawil, G. S. - Claimant Cremades, B. M. - Respondent Hanefeld, I. - President	942.40 mln USD	Data not available	Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims	None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage	Award dated 17 May 2024 (English) Award dated 17 May 2024 (Spanish)	Dissenting Opinion by Guido Santiago Tawil (English) Dissenting Opinion by Guido Santiago Tawil (Spanish)	ICSID annulment proceedings	Pending (ICSID annulment proceedings)	None	None	Greenwood, C. - President Wallgren-Lindholm, C. - Member Moreno Rodríguez, J. A. - Member
24	2020	Frenkel v. Croatia	Ahron G. Frenkel v. Republic of Croatia (ICSID Case No. ARB/20/49)	Croatia - Israel BIT (2000)	ICSID	ICSID	Investment: Investments in the construction of a golf resort near Dubrovnik. Summary: Claims arising out of Croatia’s allegedly arbitrary and unfair actions that have led to a standstill in construction of a golf resort.	Investments in the construction of a golf resort near Dubrovnik.	Decided in favour of State	Croatia	Israel	Tertiary: F - Construction Tertiary: R - Arts, entertainment and recreation Tertiary: L - Real estate activities	41 - Construction of buildings 93 - Sports activities and amusement and recreation activities 68 - Real estate activities	Pinto, M. - President Alexandrov, S. A. - Claimant Douglas, Z. - Respondent	225.10 mln EUR (234.80 mln USD)	Data not available	Indirect expropriation Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims Other	None - jurisdiction declined	Award dated 29 January 2025	Dissenting Opinion of Stanimir Alexandrov	ICSID annulment proceedings	Pending (ICSID annulment proceedings)	None	None	Akande, D. - Member Cicchetti, T. M. - Member Scherer, M. (**) - President
25	2020	GPIX v. India	GPIX LLC v. The Republic of India (PCA Case No. 2020-36)	India - Mauritius BIT (1998)	UNCITRAL	PCA	Investment: Summary:		Decided in favour of State	India	Mauritius	Tertiary: H - Transportation and storage	52 - Warehousing and support activities for transportation	Jones, D. - President Blanch, J. - Claimant Sikri, A. K. - Respondent	Data not available	Data not available	Data not available	None - all claims dismissed at the merits stage	Award dated 21 February 2024	None	None	None	None	None	None

No results found

No.	Name	Cases as Respondent State	Cases as Home State of claimant
1	Albania	14	1
2	Algeria	14	2
3	Angola	2	0
4	Argentina	65	6
5	Armenia	7	1
6	Australia	6	14
7	Austria	1	32
8	Azerbaijan	7	1
9	Bahamas	0	2
10	Bahrain	4	1
11	Bangladesh	1	0
12	Barbados	1	8
13	Belarus	5	2
14	Belgium	5	22
15	Belize	4	0
16	Benin	1	0
17	Bermuda	0	1
18	Bolivia, Plurinational State of	19	1
19	Bosnia and Herzegovina	5	0
20	British Virgin Islands	0	1
21	Bulgaria	13	3
22	Burkina Faso	1	0
23	Burundi	4	0
24	Cabo Verde	1	0
25	Cambodia	1	0
26	Cameroon	3	0
27	Canada	36	79
28	Chile	8	10
29	China	9	20
30	Colombia	28	5
31	Comoros	1	0
32	Congo	3	0
33	Congo, Democratic Republic of the	4	0
34	Costa Rica	16	2
35	Croatia	20	3
36	Cuba	1	0
37	Cyprus	5	38
38	Czechia	43	8
39	Denmark	2	9
40	Dominican Republic	11	2
41	Ecuador	31	0
42	Egypt	48	7
43	El Salvador	5	1
44	Equatorial Guinea	2	0
45	Estonia	5	3
46	Ethiopia	6	0
47	European Union	2	0
48	Finland	3	3
49	France	4	69
50	Gabon	3	0
51	Gambia	2	0
52	Georgia	18	1
53	Germany	7	90
54	Ghana	4	0
55	Gibraltar	0	2
56	Greece	5	16
57	Grenada	2	0
58	Guatemala	9	2
59	Guyana	1	0
60	Honduras	12	0
61	Hong Kong, China SAR	0	2
62	Hungary	18	4
63	India	30	12
64	Indonesia	7	1
65	Iran, Islamic Republic of	1	6
66	Iraq	6	0
67	Ireland	0	2
68	Israel	0	8
69	Italy	15	53
70	Jamaica	0	1
71	Japan	1	6
72	Jordan	10	10
73	Kazakhstan	21	7
74	Kenya	1	1
75	Korea, Republic of	10	9
76	Kuwait	7	9
77	Kyrgyzstan	18	1
78	Lao People's Democratic Republic	4	0
79	Latvia	10	5
80	Lebanon	6	7
81	Lesotho	2	0
82	Libya	23	2
83	Liechtenstein	0	1
84	Lithuania	8	8
85	Luxembourg	1	48
86	Macao, China SAR	0	1
87	Madagascar	4	0
88	Malaysia	4	10
89	Malta	1	5
90	Mauritius	4	17
91	Mexico	60	7
92	Moldova, Republic of	14	1
93	Mongolia	6	0
94	Montenegro	6	0
95	Morocco	10	0
96	Mozambique	5	0
97	Myanmar	3	0
98	Nepal	1	0
99	Netherlands	4	137
100	Nicaragua	3	0
101	Nigeria	5	0
102	North Macedonia	11	0
103	Norway	3	6
104	Oman	4	2
105	Pakistan	12	0
106	Panama	26	12
107	Papua New Guinea	1	0
108	Paraguay	4	0
109	Peru	36	5
110	Philippines	8	1
111	Poland	41	8
112	Portugal	1	10
113	Qatar	3	9
114	Romania	27	1
115	Russian Federation	34	28
116	Rwanda	2	0
117	Saudi Arabia	11	8
118	Senegal	7	0
119	Serbia	16	0
120	Seychelles	0	2
121	Sierra Leone	1	0
122	Singapore	0	15
123	Slovakia	14	1
124	Slovenia	6	3
125	South Africa	1	3
126	Spain	58	80
127	Sri Lanka	5	0
128	Sudan	2	0
129	Sweden	1	15
130	Switzerland	1	53
131	Syrian Arab Republic	2	0
132	Tajikistan	2	0
133	Tanzania, United Republic of	14	0
134	Thailand	2	0
135	Trinidad and Tobago	3	0
136	Tunisia	4	2
137	Türkiye	19	51
138	Turkmenistan	17	0
139	Uganda	1	0
140	Ukraine	35	19
141	United Arab Emirates	7	15
142	United Kingdom	1	124
143	United States of America	25	238
144	Uruguay	8	1
145	Uzbekistan	10	1
146	Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of	66	4
147	Viet Nam	13	0
148	Yemen	3	0
149	Zimbabwe	3	0

No results found

Top

Investment Dispute Settlement Navigator

Known treaty-based ISDS cases:

About

Methodology

Disclaimer

Cases included in the Navigator

Sources of information and frequency of updating

Methodological notes for the recording of data

Share

Case name and number

Year

Countries

Economic sector and subsector

Applicable IIA

Arbitral rules and administering institution

Arbitrators and annulment committee members

Amount of compensation (USD or USD equivalent)

Breaches of IIA provisions alleged and found

Follow-on proceedings

Arbitrations initiated

Arbitral decisions issued

Follow-on decisions issued

Primary

Secondary

Tertiary

BITs

Treaties with Investment Provisions

Year of signature

Applicable arbitration rules

Administering institution

Appointments in original proceedings

ICSID annulment committee members

Appointed by claimant

Appointed by / Designated to Respondent

President

Sole arbitrator

Sought by claimant(s)

Awarded by tribunal

Agreed in settlement

Breaches of IIA provisions alleged

Breaches of IIA provisions found

ICSID annulment proceedings

Judicial review by national courts

ICSID resubmission proceedings