loading...

Investment Treaty Arbitration

Enyo Law’s international arbitration group is experienced in representing both investors and States in arbitrations under international investment treaties (including bilateral investment treaties and the Energy Charter Treaty).

Our multilingual team has experience of investment treaty arbitrations under the auspices of the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), as well as under the arbitration rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC), and the International Court of Arbitration (ICC).

As an independent firm, Enyo Law has the agility required to assemble, on very short notice, bespoke teams of lawyers. Our team comprises both individuals with backgrounds in public international law, and in private law. We are able to work in partnership with other law firms, leading legal scholars and barristers across jurisdictions. Our aim is to offer bespoke, high-quality, legal services, in the most cost-effective manner.

Enyo Law’s independence also allows us on occasion to make alternative fee arrangements applicable to clients’ financial needs. We are also able to advise on the availability of third-party funding for investment claims, and frequently do so.

We also represent clients in connection with the enforcement of investment treaty arbitration awards.

Representative cases:
  • Acting for IMC Invest in an ICSID arbitration against the Kyrgyz Republic under the US – Kyrgyzstan BIT arising out of a ban on uranium mining.
  • Acting for Ascent Resources Plc and Ascent Slovenia Ltd in an ICSID arbitration against the Republic of Slovenia under the ECT arising out of a ban on low-volume hydraulic stimulation in the production of hydrocarbons.
  • Acting for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in an ICC arbitration brought by Qatari investors in the pharmaceutical sector under the OIC agreement.
  • Advising a Turkish investor in relation to Bilateral Investment Treaty claims worth USD50 million against the Republic of Azerbaijan arising out of investments under a contract with a state utility company.
News
Jul 9, 2024
The importance of directors’ knowledge in establishing the largest ever wrongful trading award and the first ever award for “misfeasant trading”
The High Court recently issued its judgment against two former directors of BHS Group Limited, Mr Henningson and Mr Chandler...
Jul 4, 2024
Supreme Court rules that planning authorities cannot give permission for oil drilling projects without considering the environmental effects of the oil’s combustion
On 20 June 2024, the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in R (on the application of Finch on behalf...
Jul 2, 2024
UK sanctions ground payment obligations under letters of credit in aircraft leasing case
In Celestial Aviation Services Limited v UniCredit Bank GmbH, London Branch [2024] EWCA Civ 628, the Court of Appeal held...
Jun 13, 2024
Fair winds favour plaintiffs in wasted expenditure cases
A recent judgment of the High Court of Australia has clarified aspects of contract law and the availability of damages...