Canada
NO. | Year of initiation | Short case name | Summary | Outcome of original proceedings | Respondent State | Home State of investor |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 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 |
2 | 2022 | Westmoreland v. Canada (III) |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Canada | United States of America |
3 | 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 |
4 | 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 |
5 | 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 |
6 | 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 |
7 | 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 |
8 | 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 |
9 | 2016 | Global Telecom Holding v. Canada |
Investment: Interests in a Canadian telecommunications enterprise, Globalive Wireless Management Corporation (“Wind Mobile”), from 2008 to 2014. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged failure to create a fair, competitive and favourable regulatory environment for new investors in the telecommunications sector. |
Decided in favour of State | Canada | Egypt |
10 | 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 |
11 | 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 |
12 | 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 |
13 | 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 |
14 | 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 |
15 | 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 |
16 | 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 |
17 | 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 |
18 | 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 |
19 | 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 |
20 | 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 |
21 | 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 |
22 | 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 |
23 | 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 |
24 | 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 |
25 | 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 |
26 | 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 |
27 | 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 |
28 | 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 |
29 | 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 |
30 | 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 |
31 | 2000 | UPS v. Canada |
Investment: Parcel delivery service provider company. Summary: Claims arising out of allegedly anti-competitive practices of Canada and Canada Post Corporation in the non-monopoly postal services market. |
Decided in favour of State | Canada | United States of America |
32 | 1999 | Pope & Talbot v. Canada |
Investment: Ownership of local subsidiary for the operation of three sawmills in Canada and export of softwood lumber produced. Summary: Claims arising out of Canada's implementation of the U.S.-Canada Softwood Lumber Agreement, in which Canada agreed to charge a fee on exports of softwood lumber in excess of a certain number of board feet. |
Decided in favour of investor | Canada | United States of America |
33 | 1998 | Myers v. Canada |
Investment: Corporation engaged in treatment of Polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB); ownership of local subsidiary engaged in related activities. Summary: Claims arising out of Canada's ban on the export of PCB wastes from Canada to the United States in late 1995 and alleged economic harm to the investor resulting from the imposition of such ban through interference with its operations, lost contracts and opportunities in Canada. |
Decided in favour of investor | Canada | United States of America |
34 | 1997 | Ethyl v. Canada |
Investment: Sole shareholder of company acting as the only importer and distributer of MMT (fuel additive) across Canada. Summary: Claims arising out of a Canadian statute banning imports of the gasoline additive MMT for use in unleaded gasoline. |
Settled | Canada | United States of America |
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 | 2023 | CDPQ and CDP v. Mexico |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Mexico | Canada |
3 | 2023 | First Majestic v. Mexico (II) |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Mexico | Canada |
4 | 2023 | Goldgroup v. Mexico |
Investment: Shareholding of 50% in DynaResource de Mexico, S.A. de C.V., which owns the high-grade gold exploration project San José de Gracia located in the State of Sinaloa; ownership of 100% in the Cerro Prieto heap-leach gold mine in the State of Sonora. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged failure of Mexican courts to reach a decision on the merits and provide relief to the claimant after 10 years of legal disputes with DynaResource, Inc., concerning the claimant’s stake in DynaResource de Mexico, S.A. de C.V., and the San José de Gracia gold mine. According to the claimant, the treatment and inaction by the Mexican courts have resulted in a judicial expropriation of its investment in the San José de Gracia gold mining project. |
Pending | Mexico | Canada |
5 | 2022 | Coropi and others v. Serbia |
Investment: Investments in a real estate project. Summary: |
Pending | Serbia |
Cyprus Canada |
6 | 2022 | Nova Scotia v. Peru |
Investment: Shareholding in local subsidiary Scotiabank Peru S.A., which had acquired the local bank Banco Wiese. Summary: Claims arising out of the constitutional court’s dismissal of a case brought by the claimant’s local subsidiary Scotiabank Peru challenging the accrual of default interest on long-disputed taxes imposed by Peru’s tax authority SUNAT. According to the claimant, the default interest was improperly applied on tax liabilities during a period of delay caused by the state in administrative proceedings. |
Pending | Peru | Canada |
7 | 2021 | First Majestic v. Mexico (I) |
Investment: Ownership of Primero Empresa Minera, S.A. de C.V. (“Primero”), a local subsidiary which owns and operates several silver and gold mines in Mexico. Summary: Claims arising out of the national tax authority’s actions to secure amounts allegedly owned by the claimant’s local subsidiary Primero pursuant to tax reassessments as well as the tax authority’s rejection of the claimant’s requests for the initiation of dispute resolution procedures under double taxation treaties. According to the claimant, the tax authority unlawfully opted to ignore advance pricing agreements it had signed with Primero related to the company’s silver sales. |
Pending | Mexico | Canada |
8 | 2021 | Montero Mining v. Tanzania |
Investment: Rights under a retention licence for exploration activities at the Wigu Hill rare earth deposit. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s cancellation of the claimant’s retention licence for the Wigu Hill rare earth element project. |
Pending | Tanzania, United Republic of | Canada |
9 | 2021 | Sanitek and others v. Armenia |
Investment: Summary: |
Pending | Armenia |
Canada Lebanon |
10 | 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 |
11 | 2020 | ES Holdings and 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. |
Pending | Mexico | Canada |
12 | 2020 | Lupaka v. Peru |
Investment: Ownership (100% interest) of Invicta Mining Corporation S.A.C., a local subsidiary holding six mining concessions for a gold mining project in the Huaura Province, northeast of the city of Lima. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s actions and omissions, through the local community of Parán, related to an alleged illegal blockade and invasion of the claimant’s “Invicta Gold Development Project“, which ultimately resulted in the loss of the mining project. |
Pending | Peru | Canada |
13 | 2020 | Sukyas v. Romania (II) |
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 | Canada |
14 | 2020 | Winshear v. Tanzania |
Investment: Four retention licences held by a local subsidiary for the exploration of mineral resources at the SMP gold project in southwest Tanzania. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s cancellation of retention licences for mineral rights issued prior to the 2018 mining regulations, following amendments to the Mining Act in 2017, and the transfer of related mining rights to the government, including those held by the claimant’s local subsidiary for the SMP gold project. |
Settled | Tanzania, United Republic of | Canada |
15 | 2019 | Aecon v. Ecuador |
Investment: Shareholding of 45.5% in Corporación Quiport S.A. (Quiport), an international consortium holding a concession for the construction of the new international airport in Quito. Summary: Claims arising out of the tax authority’s alleged denial of certain tax exemptions to the claimant related to an airport construction project undertaken by the Quiport consortium in which the claimant had participated. |
Pending | Ecuador | Canada |
16 | 2018 | Aris Mining (formerly Gran Colombia) v. Colombia |
Investment: Mining rights over gold and silver deposits in the Segovia and Marmato municipalities in Colombia. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged failure to address civil strikes and other disruptions to the claimant’s mining projects caused by illegal artisanal miners and a guerilla group. |
Pending | Colombia | Canada |
17 | 2018 | Galway Gold v. Colombia |
Investment: Ownership of the Reina de Oro and Coloro gold mines located in the Vetas mining district in northern Colombia. Summary: Claims arising out of the Colombian Constitutional Court's decision to ban mining operations in the páramos, a range of high-altitude wetlands that serve as a primary source of the country’s water supply. |
Pending | Colombia | Canada |
18 | 2018 | Korsgaard v. Croatia |
Investment: Acquisition of real estate property in Croatia through local companies ReCap International d.o.o. and Zagreb Panorama d.o.o. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged measures to prevent the claimant from obtaining ownership over several formerly socially-owned real estate properties in Croatia, mostly located on the Adriatic coast. According to the claimant, it acquired the real estate from Serbian companies via two local subsidiaries. |
Decided in favour of State | Croatia | Canada |
19 | 2018 | Rand Investments and others v. Serbia |
Investment: Indirect majority shareholding in BD Agro AD (“BD Agro”), a dairy farm located on the outskirts of Belgrade, Serbia. Summary: Claims arising out of a state agency’s 2015 termination of an agreement for the privatization of BD Agro concluded with a Serbian buyer after a public auction in 2005. According to the claimants, the termination involved the subsequent seizure of majority shares in BD Agro held by the Serbian buyer, which were beneficially owned by the claimants. The state agency’s actions allegedly led to BD Agro’s bankruptcy in 2016. |
Decided in favour of investor | Serbia |
Canada Cyprus |
20 | 2018 | Red Eagle v. Colombia |
Investment: Ownership of the 352-hectare Vetas gold mine. Summary: Claims arising out of the Colombian Constitutional Court's decision to ban mining operations in the páramos, a range of high-altitude wetlands that serve as a primary source of the country’s water supply. |
Pending | Colombia | Canada |
21 | 2017 | Agrium v. Egypt |
Investment: Shareholding of 26% in Misr Fertilizers Production Company S.A.E. (MOPCO), a nitrogen producer based in Egypt. Summary: |
Settled | Egypt | Canada |
22 | 2017 | Air Canada v. Venezuela |
Investment: Investment in air transportation services. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged failure to approve the claimant’s requests to convert its Bolivar-denominated returns into U.S. dollars for repatriation. |
Decided in favour of investor | Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | Canada |
23 | 2017 | Sastre and others v. Mexico |
Investment: Investments in boutique hotels. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged illegal seizure by municipal and federal officials of hotel properties in the Mexican state of Quintana Roo in which the claimants had invested. According to the claimants, the federal courts failed to remedy the alleged illegal dispossessions in subsequent local court proceedings. |
Decided in favour of State | Mexico |
Argentina France Portugal Canada |
24 | 2016 | Alhambra v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Rights under two gold mining licences held by the claimants’ local subsidiary, Joint Venture Saga Creek Gold Company LLP, and an exploration and exploitation contract with the Republic of Kazakhstan. Summary: Claims arising out of an allegedly unlawful assessment of taxes on the claimants’ local subsidiary Saga Creek, the withholding of required mining and financing approvals and other actions of the Government, which allegedly culminated in the bankruptcy of Saga Creek in 2015. |
Decided in favour of investor | Kazakhstan |
Netherlands Canada |
25 | 2016 | Eco Oro v. Colombia |
Investment: Mining rights held under a concession contract, comprising the Angostura gold and silver deposit in the Santurbán region of northeastern Colombia. Summary: Claims arising out of the National Mining Agency’s decision (2016) that deprived the claimant of its mining rights in respect of 50% of the concession area (a gold and silver deposit) held by it since the mid-1990s. The relevant area was found to fall within the Santurbán Páramo, an environmental conservation zone. The Mining Agency’s actions followed the decision of Colombia’s Constitutional Court that broadened restrictions on mining in high-mountain ecosystems known as páramos (sources of the country’s freshwater supply), striking down legal provisions that had stabilized the rights of mining projects in those areas negotiated before 2010. |
Pending | Colombia | Canada |
26 | 2016 | Gold Pool v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Management contract rights to operate certain gold mines in Kazakhstan. Summary: Claims arising out of the allegedly wrongful termination in 1997 of the claimant’s management contract rights to operate certain gold mines in Kazakhstan. |
Decided in favour of State | Kazakhstan | Canada |
27 | 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 |
28 | 2015 | Gabriel Resources v. Romania |
Investment: Majority shareholding in Rosia Montana Gold Corporation, a Romanian mining company, co-owned with a State-owned entity. Summary: Claims arising out of the allegedly discriminatory measures relating to the approval of an environmental impact assessment and the issuance of an environmental permit required to start exploitation of the claimant's mining project. |
Pending | Romania |
Canada United Kingdom |
29 | 2015 | Lion v. Mexico |
Investment: Promissory notes and mortgages over three properties located in Mexico. Summary: Claims arising out of Mexican authorities’ cancellation of promissory notes held by the claimant and of related mortgages which designated the claimant as the beneficiary. |
Decided in favour of investor | Mexico | Canada |
30 | 2015 | Miedzi Copper v. Poland |
Investment: Ownership of Miedzi Copper Corp. that holds a number of copper exploration concessions in Poland. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s alleged revocation of two copper exploitation permits awarded to the claimant’s local subsidiary Miedzi Copper and the subsequent allocation of the permits to Poland’s largest copper producer KGHM. |
Data not available | Poland | Canada |
31 | 2014 | Bear Creek Mining v. Peru |
Investment: Rights under a concession agreement concluded with the claimant to operate the Santa Ana silver mining site in Peru. Summary: Claims arising out of the enactment by the Government of Supreme Decree 032 that revoked claimant's concession to operate the Santa Ana mining project in Peru on the ground that it was no longer in the national interest, resulting in a complete cease of activities at Santa Ana and alleged significant damages to the claimant. |
Decided in favour of investor | Peru | Canada |
32 | 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 |
33 | 2014 | Infinito Gold v. Costa Rica |
Investment: Rights under an exploration permit and an exploitation concession for the development of a gold mine in Costa Rica, known as Las Crucitas Project. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government’s revocation of claimant's concession for a gold mining project at Crucitas de Cutris, in northern Costa Rica, through alleged court and executive measures without payment of adequate compensation. |
Decided in favour of neither party (liability found but no damages awarded) | Costa Rica | Canada |
34 | 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 |
35 | 2013 | Stans Energy v. Kyrgyzstan |
Investment: Indirect ownership by Stans Energy Corp. of Kutisay Mining LLC that held a licence for mining rare earth, bismuth, molybdenum and silver at the “Kutessay II” deposit. Summary: Claims arising out of a series of measures by the Government which allegedly resulted in the impossibility to carry out activities on the mineral deposit “Kutessay II” in accordance with the mining license previously granted to Kutisay Mining LLC. |
Decided in favour of investor | Kyrgyzstan | Canada |
36 | 2013 | WWM and Carroll v. Kazakhstan |
Investment: Rights under a contract concluded with the Government to operate one of Kazakhstan's largest uranium-processing facilities. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's alleged failure to observe its contractual obligations, including the granting of an export license to WWM to market Kazakh uranium internationally, which allegedly led WWM to suspend operations at its Kazakh facility and resulted in the bankruptcy, confiscation and forced sale of its local assets. |
Decided in favour of investor | Kazakhstan | Canada |
37 | 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 |
38 | 2012 | Rusoro Mining v. Venezuela |
Investment: Ownership of 24 Venezuelan subsidiaries holding a total of 58 mining concessions and contracts for the exploration and exploitation of gold in Venezuela. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's enactment of a series of measures that allegedly dismantled the legal regime for the marketing of gold in Venezuela and culminated in the nationalisation and control of Rusoro’s investments in Venezuela without compensation. |
Decided in favour of investor | Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | Canada |
39 | 2011 | Copper Mesa v. Ecuador |
Investment: Concession rights held through local subsidiaries for two open-pit mines located in the Junín and Chaucha regions of Ecuador; right of acquisition over a third mining project in the area of Telinbela. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged termination by the Government of mining concessions in the Ecuadorian areas of Junín, Chaucha and Telinbela, in which the claimant had invested. |
Decided in favour of investor | Ecuador | Canada |
40 | 2011 | Crystallex v. Venezuela |
Investment: Rights under a mine operation contract; capital contributions of over USD 300 million. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's termination of claimant's mine operation contract over a gold deposit situated in Las Cristinas, after it refused to issue an environmental permit allowing extraction to initiate. |
Decided in favour of investor | Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | Canada |
41 | 2011 | Khan Resources v. Mongolia |
Investment: Majority shareholding in Mongolian joint venture subsidiary that held uranium mining and exploration licenses in Mongolia. Summary: Claims arising out of Mongolia’s cancellation of claimant's mining and exploration licenses for a uranium deposit located in the Dornod province in northeastern Mongolia. |
Decided in favour of investor | Mongolia |
Canada Netherlands British Virgin Islands |
42 | 2011 | Nova Scotia Power v. Venezuela (II) |
Investment: Rights under a coal supply agreement concluded between Nova Scotia Power and Guasare Coal International, an enterprise allegedly controlled by Venezuela. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged termination by the Government of Nova Scotia’s right to receive up to 1.7 million metric tons of coal at fixed prices from the Paso Diablo coal mine in Venezuela. |
Decided in favour of State | Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | Canada |
43 | 2011 | Zamora Gold v. Ecuador |
Investment: Shareholding in three mining subsidiaries, Mineral del Austro Mineraustro S.A, Minreal S.A, and Concumaysa Compania Minera Cumay del Ecuador S.A. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged expropriation of claimant's shares in three subsidiary companies engaged in the exploration and exploitation of mineral properties in Ecuador, pursuant to a resolution of the Ecuadorean Guarantee Deposit Agency. |
Data not available | Ecuador | Canada |
44 | 2010 | Allard v. Barbados |
Investment: Ownership of a wildlife sanctuary consisting of 34-acre natural wetlands. Summary: Claims arising out of alleged environmental damage and indirect expropriation by the Government of the Graeme Hall Nature Sanctuary, a wildlife sanctuary in Barbados owned by the claimant. |
Decided in favour of State | Barbados | Canada |
45 | 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 |
46 | 2009 | Gold Reserve v. Venezuela |
Investment: Mining rights held indirectly by claimant in Venezuela under the mining concessions known as the “Brisas Concession” and the “Unicornio Concession” for the extraction of gold, copper and molybdenum. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's alleged deprivation of claimant's rights in certain gold and copper project in Venezuela, following the issuance of an administrative ruling by the Ministry of the Environment declaring the nullity of certain construction permit and the subsequent termination of claimant's mining concessions. |
Decided in favour of investor | Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | Canada |
47 | 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 |
48 | 2008 | Nova Scotia Power v. Venezuela (I) |
Investment: Rights under a coal supply agreement concluded between Nova Scotia Power and Guasare Coal International, an enterprise allegedly controlled by Venezuela. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged Government's termination of Nova Scotia Power Incorporated’s right to receive up to 1.7 million metric tons of coal at fixed prices from the Paso Diablo coal mine in Venezuela. |
Decided in favour of State | Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | Canada |
49 | 2008 | Quadrant Pacific v. Costa Rica |
Investment: Indirect controlling interests in five orange plantations in the Canton of "Los Chiles", located on the northern border of Costa Rica. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's alleged failure to enforce its laws for the protection of private property; particularly, its failure to address the continuing illegal trespass on claimants’ citrus farm holdings located in Costa Rica, causing damages to the investors' farm landholdings. |
Discontinued | Costa Rica | Canada |
50 | 2007 | Anderson v. Costa Rica |
Investment: Capital contributions in an illegal financial intermediation scheme operated by two Costa Rican individuals. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged Government's failure to provide proper vigilance and governmental regulatory supervision over the national financial system, which led the 137 individual claimants to lose their deposits made in a Costa Rican business acting under a Ponzi scheme. |
Decided in favour of State | Costa Rica | Canada |
51 | 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 |
52 | 2007 | Frontier v. Czech Republic |
Investment: Capital contributions to finance the purchase of assets of a bankrupt State-owned Czech aircraft manufacturing company under certain unanimous shareholder agreement; claims to money in the form of an arbitral award in Frontier's favour. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged wrongful failure of Czech courts to recognise and enforce an interim and final award in claimant's favour, relating to alleged breaches of a shareholder agreement concluded with a Czech company for a joint venture project in the aviation manufacturing industry in the Czech Republic. |
Decided in favour of State | Czechia | Canada |
53 | 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 |
54 | 2005 | Scotiabank v. Argentina |
Investment: Ownership of local bank, Scotiabank Quilmes SA. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged negative effects of the forced pesification of the bank's local subsidiary US-dollar assets and liabilities, during the Argentinean economic crisis of 2002. |
Settled | Argentina | Canada |
55 | 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 |
56 | 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 |
57 | 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 |
58 | 2004 | Ulemek v. Croatia |
Investment: Shareholding in local joint venture engaged in activities concerning office machinery and equipment. Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged mistreatment to claimant's investment in the Croatian joint venture Jugoturbina Select; particularly, concerning allegations that as a result of the general state of armed conflict and the claimant's Serbian ancestry, he was allegedly forced to leave Croatia in the spring of 1991, and his investment was confiscated and transferred to other companies. |
Decided in favour of State | Croatia | Canada |
59 | 2004 | Vannessa Ventures v. Venezuela |
Investment: Majority shareholding in a company holding a mining concession for gold and copper. Summary: Claims arising out of the Government's retraction of claimant's mining rights in Las Cristinas in the south east of Venezuela, one of the world’s greatest undeveloped sources of gold, under the allegation that claimant's purchase of the shares was illegal. |
Decided in favour of State | Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | Canada |
60 | 2003 | Encana v. Ecuador |
Investment: Ownership of local subsidiaries that had entered into participation contracts for the exploration and exploitation of oil and gas reserves with Petroecuador, a State-owned entity. Summary: Claims arising out of VAT refunds to which the claimant's subsidiaries were allegedly entitled under Ecuadorian laws and regulations. |
Decided in favour of State | Ecuador | Canada |
61 | 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 |
62 | 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 |
63 | 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 |
64 | 2002 | Thunderbird v. Mexico |
Investment: Ownership of three gaming facilities. Summary: Claims arising out of the closure of the investor's gaming facilities by the Mexican government agency that had jurisdiction over gaming activity. |
Decided in favour of State | Mexico | Canada |
65 | 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 |
66 | 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 |
67 | 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 |
68 | 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 |