With the global financial crisis, solar power incentives schemes became unbearably costly and Spain repealed those incentives. Consequently, many investors brought arbitration claims under the Energy Charter Treaty.
Despite the fact that the ECT was initiated and designed by the EU, there are compelling grounds to doubt the compatibility of the ECT’s arbitration clause with the principles underpinning the EU’s judicial system.
In a second international ruling against retroactive cuts in renewables support introduced by the Spanish government in 2013, a Swedish arbitration panel has awarded a Luxembourg-based investment firm €53 million compensation.
The case is one of several brought to courts in Europe by Moldovan businessman Anatolie Stati who is attempting to force the Kazakh government to pay up in a dispute about his energy investments in the oil-rich country.
The EC claimed intra-EU investment treaty arbitration is in breach of EU law. If the CJEU were to confirm the decision of the EC, the application of the ICSID Convention within the EU would be seriously endangered.
Moldovan businessman Anatolie Stati will ask bailiffs to sell a $5.2 billion stake in the Kashagan oil field owned by a Kazakh sovereign wealth fund if Astana refuses to pay a $500 million arbitration award.
The recent Eiser v. Spain ICSID award is yet another example of a state being condemned to pay a large monetary sum merely because an investor has been economically disadvantaged by a reasonable and necessary regulatory change.
Australian company planned was to mine tantulum, but seventeen years later, the company is suing the Egyptian government for potentially hundreds of millions of dollars after the military regime blocked plans.