Navigation

  1. Home
  2. Cases
  3. List of cases

As of 1 June 2022, the Secretariat is aware of 150 investment arbitration cases instituted under the Energy Charter Treaty (sometimes invoked together with a bilateral investment treaty). A full list with information is available here

Since parties to investment arbitration under Article 26 ECT are not obliged to notify the Secretariat of the existence or substance of their dispute, some awards (and even the existence of some proceedings) remain confidential. The Secretariat compiles information (which cannot be considered as exhaustive) from delegates and public sources (including specialized reporting services such as Global Arbitration Review (GAR), Investment Arbitration Reporter (IAReporter) and ItaLaw). The Secretariat assumes no responsibility for eventual errors or omissions in these data and welcomes any additional information or clarification on specific cases (at legalaffairs@encharter.org or using the online contact form). Some case reports prepared by TDM/IACL can be found here. 

Advanced search

Reset

There are 150 result(s)

 Mercuria Energy Group Ltd. v. Poland, SCC Case No. 096/2008 
  • > Claimant : Mercuria Energy Group Ltd.
  • > Nationality : Cyprus
  • > Respondent : Poland
  • > Procedural rules applied : SCC
  • > Chair : Pierre Tercier
  • > Arbitrator appointed by Claimant : Vaughan Lowe
  • > Arbitrator appointed by Respondent : Albert Jan van den Berg
  • > Invoked instruments : ECT
  • > Articles mentioned : Article 10 (1)
  • , Article 13
  • > Breaches alleged :  
  • > Breaches found : No breach
  • > Case status : Award rendered
  • > Year of the award or agreement : 2011
  • > Year of registration : 2008

  • > Subject matter of the dispute: Government's implementation of a EU Directive calling for an increase in the mandatory fuel reserves held by firms and its alleged negative impact upon Mercuria's Polish subsidiary engaged in the importation of fuel
  • > Amount claimed: estim. USD 700 million 
  • > Amount awarded: ZERO
  • > Costs of arbitration: N/A
  • > Award legal costs: N/A
  • > Award costs of arbitration: Claimant bears 75% of the costs


View this article in full page
 Alapli Elektrik B.V. v. Turkey, ICSID Case No. ARB/08/13 
  • > Claimant : Alapli Elektrik B.V.
  • > Nationality : Netherlands
  • > Respondent : Turkey
  • > Procedural rules applied : ICSID
  • > Chair : William Park
  • > Arbitrator appointed by Claimant : Marc Lalonde
  • > Arbitrator appointed by Respondent : Brigitte Stern
  • > Invoked instruments : ECT and BIT
  • > Articles mentioned : Article 26 (1)
  • , Article 10 (1)
  • , Article 1 (6)
  • , Article 1 (7)
  • , Article 1
  • , Article 10
  • , Article 13
  • , Article 17
  • , Article 26
  • > Breaches alleged :  
  • > Breaches found : No jurisdiction under ECT
  • > Case status : Award rendered
  • > Year of the award or agreement : 2012
  • > Follow-on proceedings : Award upheld by ICSID annulment committee
  • > Year of registration : 2008

  • > Subject matter of the dispute: Claims arising out of a concession to develop, finance, construct, own, operate and transfer a combined cycle power plant in Turkey and a number of legislative changes concerning infrastructure projects in Turkey
  • > BIT invoked: Netherlands-Turkey BIT
  • > Amount claimed: Not specified
  • > Amount awarded: ZERO
  • > Costs of arbitration: Not specified
  • > Award legal costs: Each party bears its own legal costs
  • > Award costs of arbitration: Parties share costs equally

 

ARBITRAL DECISION

16 July 2012

Excerpts of Award  

12 July 2012 - Dissenting opinion of The Hon. Marc Lalonde

ANNULMENT PROCEEDINGS

20 April 2016 

Decision on Annulment 

  


View this article in full page
 Remington Worldwide Ltd. v. Ukraine, SCC 

  • > Subject matter of the dispute: Alleged non-enforcement in Ukraine of a judgment rendered by the Russian courts in favour of Remington regarding unpaid debts owed under a sales contract by the Ukrainian state enterprise “Energoatom”
  • > Amount claimed: USD 35,923,997.16
  • > Amount awarded: USD 4,493,464.97
  • > Costs of arbitration: N/A
  • > Award legal costs: N/A
  • > Award costs of arbitration: N/A 


ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS

26 April 2012 - Enforcement Decision by the Pechersky District Court of Kyiv

 

 


View this article in full page
 Vattenfall AB, Vattenfall Europe AG, Vattenfall Europe Generation AG & Co. KG v. Germany, ICSID Case No. ARB/09/6 

  • > Subject matter of the dispute: Claims arising out of the conduct of the Hamburg government authorities relating to the administrative procedure for the issuing of permits for a new coal-fired power plant at the site of a former plant
  • > Amount claimed: estim. EUR 1.4 billion
  • > Amount awarded: N/A
  • > Costs of arbitration: N/A
  • > Award legal costs: Each party bears its own legal costs
  • > Award costs of arbitration: Parties share costs equally

 

ARBITRAL DECISION

11 March 2011

Arbitral Award 

30 March 2009 - Request for Arbitration


View this article in full page
 Electricité de France (EDF) International S.A. v. Hungary, UNCITRAL 
  • > Claimant : Electricité de France (EDF) International S.A.
  • > Nationality : France
  • > Respondent : Hungary
  • > Procedural rules applied : UNCITRAL (PCA)
  • > Chair : Karl-Heinz Böckstiegel
  • > Arbitrator appointed by Claimant : Pierre-Marie Dupuy
  • > Arbitrator appointed by Respondent : Albert Jan van den Berg
  • > Invoked instruments : ECT
  • > Breaches alleged :  
  • > Breaches found : (10.1) Fair and equitable treatment
  • > Case status : Award rendered
  • > Year of the award or agreement : 2014
  • > Follow-on proceedings : Award upheld by national court
  • > Year of registration : 2009

  • > Subject matter of the dispute: Government's termination of long-term power purchase agreements concluded between EDF’s local subsidiary and the State-owned energy company MVM, following a ruling by the European Commission declaring that the agreements were illegal under EU State aid rules and should be terminated 
  • > Amount claimed: estim. EUR 300 million
  • > Amount awarded: EUR 107 million
  • > Costs of arbitration: N/A
  • > Award legal costs: N/A
  • > Award costs of arbitration: N/A 


ANNULMENT PROCEEDINGS

6 October 2015 

Decision on Annulment by the Swiss Federal Tribunal


View this article in full page
 EVN AG v. North Macedonia, ICSID Case No. ARB/09/10 
  • > Claimant : EVN AG
  • > Nationality : Austria
  • > Respondent : North Macedonia
  • > Procedural rules applied : ICSID
  • > Chair : Piero Bernardini
  • > Arbitrator appointed by Claimant : Francisco Orrego Vicuña
  • > Arbitrator appointed by Respondent : Vaughan Lowe
  • > Invoked instruments : ECT and BIT
  • > Breaches alleged :  
  • > Case status : Settlement agreed
  • > Year of the award or agreement : 2011
  • > Year of registration : 2009

  • > Subject matter of the dispute: Alleged actions by regulatory authorities and government agencies in relation to the pricing of electricity and compensation for public obligations in respect to renewable energy
  • > BIT invoked: Austria-North Macedonia BIT
  • > Amount claimed: EUR 160 million (USD 229.1 million)
  • > Amount awarded: N/A
  • > Costs of arbitration: N/A
  • > Award legal costs: Each party bears its own legal costs
  • > Award costs of arbitration: Parties share costs equally

 

ARBITRAL DECISION

2 September 2011

Arbitral Award


View this article in full page
 Energoalians Ltd. v. Moldova, UNCITRAL 

  • > Subject matter of the dispute: Non-payment of accumulated debt by the State-owned entity Moldtranselectro and by another former partner of Energoalians, for energy supplied
  • > BIT invoked: Ukraine-Moldova BIT
  • > Amount claimed: MDL 243,577,971.11
  • > Amount awarded: MDL 195,547,212
  • > Valuation method: actual investment
  • > Interest rate: UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts 
  • > Costs of arbitration: USD 340,219
  • > Award legal costs: Claimant was awarded USD 200,000
  • > Award costs of arbitration: Costs follow the award


ARBITRAL DECISIONS

23 October 2013

Arbitral Award - Russian | English (unofficial translation)

25 October 2013

Dissenting opinion of Dominic Pellew - Russian | English (unofficial translation) 

ANNULMENT PROCEEDINGS

12 April 2016

Judgment of the Paris Court of Appeal 

28 March 2018

Judgment of the Court of Cassation of France

24 September 2019

Judgment of the Paris Court of Appeal

2 September 2021 

Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union 

ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS (United States)

13 November 2018 - Opinion and Order of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia

23 August 2019 - Memorandum Opinion of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia

15 January 2021 - Opinion Court of of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit


View this article in full page
 AES Corporation and Tau Power B.V. v. Kazakhstan, ICSID Case No. ARB/10/16 

  • > Subject matter of the dispute: 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
  • > BIT invoked: Kazakhstan-USA BIT
  • > Amount claimed: Not specified
  • > Amount awarded: ZERO (breach of the ECT but no damages awarded)
  • > Costs of arbitration: USD 855,109.23
  • > Award legal costs: Each party bears its own costs
  • > Award costs of arbitration: Claimants bear 67% of the costs

 

ARBITRAL DECISION

 

1 November 2013 

Award 


View this article in full page
 Anatolie Stati, Gabriel Stati, Ascom S.A., Terra Raf Trans Traiding Ltd. v. Kazakhstan, SCC Case No. V (116/2010) 

  • > Subject matter of the dispute: Alleged campaign of harassment by the State, which culminated with the abrupt cancellation of oil and gas exploration contracts held by claimant's local operating companies, followed by the seizure of its Kazakh assets 
  • > Amount claimed: USD 2.6 billion
  • > Amount awarded: USD 497,685,101
  • > Valuation method: income-based approach (discounted cash flow); actual investment; market-based approach (arm's length offer)
  • > Interest rate: US Treasury bills (6-month)
  • > Costs of arbitration: USD 1,069,470.98 
  • > Award legal costs: Claimant was awarded USD 8,975,496.40 (50% of legal costs)
  • > Award costs of arbitration: Respondent bears 75% of the costs

 

ARBITRAL DECISION

19 December 2013 

Award 

ANNULMENT PROCEEDINGS

9 December 2016 

Judgment of the Svea Court of Appeal - Swedish | English

24 October 2017 

Decision of the Supreme Court of Sweden - Swedish | English (unofficial translation)

9 March 2020

Decision of the Svea Court of Appeal - Swedish | English (unofficial translation)

18 May 2020

Decision of the Supreme Court of Sweden (unofficial translation)

ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS (Belgium - Italy - Luxembourg - Netherlands - United Kingdom - United States)

Belgium

25 May 2018 - Decision of Brussels Court of First Instance 

20 December 2019 - Decision of Brussels Court of First Instance

16 November 2021 - Judgment of Brussels Court of Appeal

 

Italy 

27 February 2019 - Judgment of Rome Court of Appeal

 

Luxembourg 

19 December 2019 - Judgment of Luxembourg Court of Appeal

 

Netherlands

6 November 2018 - Decision of Amsterdam Court of Appeal

7 November 2019 - Decision of Amsterdam Court of Appeal

 

United Kingdom

1 September 2015 - Decision of the High Court of Justice 

6 June 2017 - Judgment of the High Court of Justice

26 February 2018 - Notice of Discontinuance

11 May 2018 - Judgment of the High Court of Justice

22 April 2020 - Judgment of the High Court of Justice


United States

11 May 2016 - Order of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia

5 August 2016 - Memorandum Opinion of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia 

23 March 2018 - Order of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia 

23 March 2018 - Memorandum Opinion of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia

13 November 2018 - Order of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia

30 March 2019 - Memorandum Opinion of the US District Court for the District of Columbia

19 April 2019 - Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit


View this article in full page
 Khan Resources Inc., Khan Resources B.V., Cauc Holding Company Ltd. v. Mongolia, UNCITRAL 
  • > Claimant : Khan Resources Inc.; Khan Resources B.V.; Cauc Holding Company Ltd.
  • > Nationality : Canada, Netherlands, British Virgin Islands
  • > Respondent : Mongolia
  • > Procedural rules applied : UNCITRAL (PCA)
  • > Chair : David Williams
  • > Arbitrator appointed by Claimant : Yves Fortier
  • > Arbitrator appointed by Respondent : Bernard Hanotiau
  • > Invoked instruments : ECT and domestic investment law
  • ECT
  • > Articles mentioned : Article 17 (1)
  • , Article 10 (12)
  • , Article 10 (7)
  • , Article 10 (1)
  • , Article 1 (7)
  • , Article 2
  • , Article 13
  • , Article 26
  • , Article 46
  • > Breaches alleged :  
  • > Breaches found : (10.1) Umbrella clause
  • > Case status : Award rendered
  • > Year of the award or agreement : 2015
  • > Follow-on proceedings : Pending national court decision on annulment
  • > Year of registration : 2011

  • > Subject matter of the dispute: Claims arising out of Mongolia’s cancellation of claimant's mining and exploration licenses for a uranium deposit
  • > AInvoked instruments: ECT and Foreign Investment Law of Mongolia
  • > Amount claimed: USD 326 million
  • > Amount awarded: USD 80 million
  • > Valuation method: market-based approach (arm's length offer)
  • > Interest rate: LIBOR + 2%
  • > Costs of arbitration: EUR 634,882.37
  • > Award legal costs: Claimant was awarded USD 9,074,143.51
  • > Award costs of arbitration: Costs follow the award

 

ARBITRAL DECISIONS

25 July 2012

Decision on Jurisdiction

2 March 2015

Arbitral Award 


View this article in full page

Page 3 of 15.