Construction disputes

• A Central Asian conglomerate in a dispute subject to HKIAC arbitration against a European construction contractor. The dispute arose from an agreement for the construction of a hotel in Central Asia. The law of our client’s State applied.
• An Asian State-owned entity and its subsidiaries in a UNCITRAL arbitration in Stockholm against a State-owned entity in a Central Asian State. The dispute arose from an agreement for the construction of a petrochemical plant on a turnkey (EPC) basis. The amount at stake exceeded USD 200 million.
• An international joint venture and two of its shareholders in an ICC arbitration in Paris brought by a Middle Eastern contractor. The dispute concerns the construction of living quarters for a gas processing facility in Africa, including claims of force majeure in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The law of the country of the project applies.
• A major Asian energy company on force majeure claims brought in connection with a project in Pakistan. The claims arose from restrictions imposed on the project by the government of Pakistan. The contracts were governed by Pakistani law.
• Sonatrach, Respondent in an ICC arbitration in Paris brought by Saipem SpA and Saipem Contracting Algérie SpA. The dispute arose from the performance of an EPC contract related to the construction of a GPL pipeline. The Respondent was further seeking the reimbursement of certain sums following a breach of contract by Claimant. The law of the Respondent’s State applied.
• Sonatrach in a UNCITRAL arbitration in Geneva against Repsol and Gas Natural. The dispute arose from delays in the completion of an integrated project including the development of existing gas fields, the construction of a liquefaction gas plant and upstream facilities, and the commercialization of the liquefied gas. The applicable law was Algerian law and the proceedings were conducted in French.

Investment Treaty Arbitrations

• Vedanta Resources on an investment treaty claim against India concerning the Indian government’s refusal to sell Vedanta certain shares in an Indian mining company.
• The Government of a Southeast Asian State on the defence of an investment treaty arbitration brought by a Korean investor. The dispute arises out of an investment in the real estate sector in that State.
• Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., Claimant in an ICSID arbitration against the Kingdom of Sweden (ICSID Case No. ARB/22/2). The dispute relates to Sweden’s ban of Huawei’s equipment from 5G infrastructures in Sweden and the claims are brought under the China-Sweden bilateral investment treaty.
• The People’s Republic of China in an ICSID arbitration brought by Hela Schwarz GmbH (ICSID Case No. ARB/17/19). The claims are brought under the China-Germany bilateral investment treaty.
• The majority shareholders in the former Yukos Oil Company, Claimants in a series of three UNCITRAL arbitrations in The Hague against the Russian Federation in relation to the expropriation of their investment in the company. The claims were brought under the Energy Charter Treaty. The Tribunal ordered the Russian Federation to pay over USD 50 billion in damages to our clients, the largest award ever rendered by an arbitral tribunal. The Tribunal also ordered the Respondent to reimburse to our clients 75% of the legal fees they had incurred in these proceedings, as well as 100% of the arbitration costs.
• A Mongolian State-owned entity and the Mongolian State, in a complex investment dispute with global mining company Rio Tinto with regard to the massive Oyu Tolgoi mining project in Mongolia. The investment was subject to the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules. Oyu Tolgoi is one of the world’s largest copper-gold mines, located in the South Gobi region of Mongolia. The project, once fully operational, is expected to account for approximately 40% of Mongolia’s gross domestic product. A favourable settlement was reached.
• Cairn Energy PLC in a UNCITRAL arbitration against the Republic of India. The claims were brought under the UK-India bilateral investment treaty. The dispute related to retrospective tax measures adopted by the Indian Government. Over USD 5.5 billion was at stake.
• Electricité de France (EDF), Claimant in a UNCITRAL arbitration against the Republic of Hungary. The dispute arose from termination of the Power Purchase Agreements put in place during the privatisation of the electricity sector. The claims were brought under the Energy Charter Treaty and the arbitration was conducted in accordance with UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules.
• The Republic of Lithuania as Respondent in an arbitration commenced by Russian State-owned gas company Gazprom. The dispute related to Lithuania’s unbundling of gas transmission from gas production and supply in the Lithuanian gas distribution company Lietuvos Dujos, in compliance with the EU Third Energy Package and in particular Directive (EC) 2009/73. The proceedings were brought under the 1999 Russia-Lithuania bilateral investment treaty and were conducted under the 1976 UNCITRAL Arbitration Rulesdfs.
• Ukraine in an SCC arbitration in Stockholm brought by VEB.RF, the Russian State development agency. The dispute relates to sanctions and other measures allegedly targeting Russian banks in Ukraine after 2014. The claims are brought under the Ukraine-Russia bilateral investment treaty.
• The People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria as Respondent in an ICSID arbitration initiated by Mærsk Olie, Algeriet A/S (ICSID Case No. ARB/09/14). The dispute, which was brought under the Denmark–Algeria bilateral investment treaty, was in relation to windfall profit tax in the context of a production-sharing contract. Over USD 3 billion was at stake.

Commerical disputes

• A major investor in commercial real estate on a SIAC arbitration against its business partner concerning the management of a joint venture comprising of multiple malls in India.
• A Singaporean health technology company, a subsidiary of a Chinese company, on an ICC arbitration seated in New York arising from more than ten agreements with a U.S.-based company and its subsidiary, under which our client agreed to develop a highly sophisticated and customized medical software application.
• A U.S. technology company and its European subsidiary, Claimants in a HKIAC arbitration in Hong Kong against a Chinese technology company. The dispute arises from the breach of a software license and maintenance agreement. The law of California applies. Over USD 1 billion is at stake.
• A NASDAQ-listed company and a South East Asian company, Respondents in a SIAC arbitration in Singapore. The dispute arose in connection with a Share Purchase Agreement governed by Mauritius law.
• A prominent French global fashion label, Claimant in an ad hoc arbitration in Singapore against an Asian textile company. The dispute arose in connection with trademark registrations in breach of an agreement between the parties and misrepresentations by the Respondent in a great number of national trademark proceedings.

Oil & Gas disputes

• The subsidiary of an Asian State-owned company in the energy sector, Respondent in two parallel ICC arbitrations in Singapore initiated by its Asian co-shareholder and its parent company. The dispute arose from two agreements relating to the development of an oil storage facility and related port facilities in Asia. English law and the law of the Claimants’ State applied.
• An African energy company, Respondent in an ICC arbitration in Geneva initiated by three foreign partners in relation to the performance of a production-sharing agreement. The law of the Respondent’s State applied.
• An African State-owned energy producer in a dispute with a foreign partner arising from an exploration and production agreement. The dispute was in relation to the adoption by the African State of new tax legislation (windfall profit tax) as well as in relation to the determination of parties’ share in a joint oil reserve (unitization).
• An African energy company, Claimant in an ICC arbitration in Geneva brought against the African subsidiary of a European energy company and a European holding company. The dispute arose from an exploration and production agreement related to an oil field. The law of the Claimant’s State applied.
• Sonatrach, Respondent in an ICC arbitration in Geneva initiated by Total Algérie SAS and Repsol Exploración Argelia. The dispute was in relation to the interpretation of contractual provisions of a production sharing agreement regarding windfall profit tax and alleged tax stabilization provisions. Over USD 400 million was at stake. Algerian law applied.

Power disputes

• A North American subsidiary of EDF, a major European energy company, in an ICC arbitration in New York initiated by North American energy company Exelon Generation Company LLC. The dispute relates to the valuation of nuclear power plants in the U.S. currently owned jointly by EDF and Exelon and arises from the implementation of a put-option agreement between the parties. New York law applies.
• The Employer in a dispute arising from the development of a floating solar power plant in Indonesia. The dispute is subject to ICC arbitration and the contracts are governed by Indonesian and English law.
• An international consortium in a dispute arising in connection with the development of a power project in Indonesia. The relevant agreements are subject to SIAC arbitration in Singapore. English law and Indonesian law govern.
• A Pakistani Independent Power Producer (IPP) in an ICC arbitration in Singapore against a Pakistani State-owned entity. The dispute arose from Power Purchase Agreements.
• Nine Pakistani Independent Power Producers (IPPs), Claimants in an LCIA arbitration in London against a Pakistan State-owned entity. The dispute arose out the non-payment of certain amounts under Power Purchase Agreements concluded between the IPPS and the State-owned entity. Pakistani law applied

Emergency arbritation

• Emergency arbitration in construction dispute Prevailed in an emergency arbitration where we represented the owner in a complex construction project of a base camp in Africa. The emergency arbitration was initiated by the contractor, who sought to prevent the owner from drawing on performance guarantees. Our client was successful in drawing on the performance guarantees in full. Paris, ICC, Respondent; prepared all submissions, resisted emergency relief to prevent call on guarantees, appeared before emergency arbitrator. We won.

Recent experience as an arbitrator includes: 

• Presiding arbitrator in an ICC arbitration in Singapore between Chinese and French parties, in relation to the performance and termination of a supply and distribution agreement valued at USD 120 million. French law applies.
• Co-arbitrator in an ICC arbitration in London between Brazilian and Asian companies in relation to a sale of goods contract. CISG applies.
• Presiding arbitrator in a SIAC arbitration in relation to a default under a loan agreement. Singapore law applies.
• Sole arbitrator in a SIAC arbitration in Singapore in relation to a joint-venture agreement and a shareholders' agreement. Singapore law and Cambodian law apply.
• Sole arbitrator in an HKIAC arbitration between a Hong-Kong entity and a French entity, in relation to an agreement for the sale of electric equipment. Hong-Kong law applies.
• Sole arbitrator a HKIAC arbitration between a Japanese entity and a Chinese entity in relation to an agreement to develop and manufacture technology components. PRC law applied.
• Sole arbitrator in a HKIAC arbitration in Hong Kong between a Chinese entity and a European entity in relation to the sale of milling machines. PRC law applied.
• Sole arbitrator in a HKIAC arbitration in Hong Kong between a Chinese entity and an entity of an African State in relation to the sale of oil & gas equipment. PRC law applied.
• Sole arbitrator in a SIAC arbitration in Singapore between a Singapore entity and a Chinese entity in relation to an agreement for the sale of timber. Singapore law applies.
• Co-arbitrator in a BIAC arbitration in Beijing between a Chinese entity and a French entity, in relation to an automotive distributorship agreement. PRC law applies.
• Sole arbitrator in an ad-hoc arbitration in Singapore between a Singapore entity and a Chinese national in relation to an employment agreement. Singapore law applies.
• Co-arbitrator in an ICC arbitration in Paris between a Chinese entity and an African entity in relation to the construction of a steel complex. Algerian law applies.
• Co-arbitrator in a UNCITRAL arbitration in Switzerland between a Chinese entity and an entity of a Central European State in relation to an oil & gas contract. Swiss law applies.