1 |
2010
|
Stati and others v. Kazakhstan
|
Ascom Group S.A., Anatolie Stati, Gabriel Stati and Terra Raf Trans Traiding Ltd. v. Republic of Kazakhstan (SCC Case No. 116/2010)
|
The Energy Charter Treaty (1994) |
SCC |
SCC |
Investment: Rights under certain subsoil use contracts held by Ascom's local operating companies, KPM and TNG; capital contributions for oil exploration and development; assets and infrastructure related to oil field operations, including a Liquid Petroleum Gas plant.
Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged campaign of harassment by the Kazakh 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. |
Rights under certain subsoil use contracts held by Ascom's local operating companies, KPM and TNG; capital contributions for oil exploration and development; assets and infrastructure related to oil field operations, including a Liquid Petroleum Gas plant. |
Decided in favour of investor
|
Kazakhstan |
Moldova, Republic of
Romania
Gibraltar |
Primary: B - Mining and quarrying |
6 - Extraction of crude petroleum and natural gas |
Böckstiegel, K.-H. - President
Haigh, D. - Claimant
Lebedev, S. N. - Respondent |
2631.00 mln USD
|
497.00 mln USD
|
Direct expropriation
Indirect expropriation
Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims
Full protection and security, or similar
Umbrella clause
Arbitrary, unreasonable and/or discriminatory measures
Other |
Fair and equitable treatment/Minimum standard of treatment, including denial of justice claims |
Award dated 19 December 2013 |
None |
Judicial review by national courts |
Award/decision upheld (Judicial review by national courts) |
Judgment of the Svea Court of Appeal dated 9 December 2016 (English) (Judicial review by national courts)
Judgment of the Svea Court of Appeal dated 9 December 2016 (Swedish) (Judicial review by national courts)
Decision of Svea Court of Appeal dated 9 March 2020 (Swedish) (Judicial review by national courts)
Decision of Svea Court of Appeal 9 March 2020 (Unofficial English Translation) dated 9 March 2020 (Judicial review by national courts) |
Dissenting Opinion by Magnus Ulriksson (English) (Judgment of the Svea Court of Appeal dated 9 December 2016 (English))
Dissenting Opinion by Magnus Ulriksson (Swedish) (Judgment of the Svea Court of Appeal dated 9 December 2016 (Swedish)) |
None |
2 |
2008
|
Remington v. Ukraine
|
Remington Worldwide Limited v. Ukraine
|
The Energy Charter Treaty (1994) |
SCC |
SCC |
Investment: Rights under a contract for supply of power equipment; Russian judgment in claimant's favour.
Summary: Claims arising out of the alleged non-enforcement in the territory of Ukraine of a judgment rendered by the Commercial Court of Saint Petersburg and the Leningrad Region in favour of Remington regarding unpaid debts owed under a sales contract by the Ukrainian state enterprise National Nuclear Energy Generating Company “Energoatom”. |
Rights under a contract for supply of power equipment; Russian judgment in claimant's favour. |
Decided in favour of investor
|
Ukraine |
Gibraltar |
Tertiary: D - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply |
35 - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply |
Crespi Reghizzi, G. - President
Komarov, A. S. - Claimant
Kubko, E. - Respondent |
36.00 mln USD
|
4.50 mln USD
|
Other |
Other |
Final Award dated 28 April 2011 |
None |
Judicial review by national courts |
Award/decision upheld (Judicial review by national courts) |
Decision of the Pechersky District Court of Kyiv dated 26 April 2012 (Judicial review by national courts) |
None |
None |