Insights & news

Risk to Foreign Investments in the Energy sector in Mexico

  • 06/08/2021
  • Articles

This Client Alert provides an overview of current reforms in the Energy sector in Mexico and the potential effects of such reforms on foreign investments in Mexico.

Attachments:

Key contacts

Related practice areas

Related insights

Sign up for updates
    • 09/09/2021
    • Articles

    Case C-741/19: The CJEU decides that intra-EU ECT arbitration is incompatible with EU law and interprets the definition of “investment” in the ECT

    On 2 September 2021, in its judgment in Case C-741/19, Republic of Moldova v. Komstroy LLC, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) decided that intra-EU arbitration under the Energy Charter Treaty (“ECT”) is incompatible with EU law. It also gave a restrictive interpretation to the definition of “investment” in the ECT.

    Read more
    • 03/08/2021
    • Articles

    Brussels Court of Appeal Upholds Attachment Order against Kazakhstan

    On 29 June 2021, the Brussels Court of Appeal (the Court of Appeal) handed down a judgment in which it upheld a protective attachment order over more than USD 500 million worth of assets, owned by Kazakhstan, and held with the Brussels subsidiary of the Bank of New York Mellon (the BNYM). Background The proceedings before the Belgian courts result from the efforts of two Moldovan investors (Anatolie and Gabriel Stati (the Investors)) who seek to enforce an arbitral award handed down in their favour in 2013. The arbitral tribunal (chaired by Karl-Heinz Böckstiegel) had found Kazakhstan liable for a harassment campaign against the Investors which ultimately resulted in a violation of the Energy Charter Treaty provisions on Fair and Equitable Treatment. As a result, the arbitral tribunal had ordered Kazakhstan to pay USD 508 million to the Investors as compensation for the damage suffered. In the absence of voluntary payment from Kazakhstan, the Investors sought a protective attachment order from the Brussels Court of First Instance in 2017 enabling them to freeze assets owned by Kazakhstan held with BNYM pending the outcome of the proceeding leading to the recognition and enforcement of their arbitral award in Belgium. The protective attachment order was obtained in ex parte proceedings (i.e., without notice to Kazakhstan). However, upon notice of the attachment order, Kazakhstan lodged a third-party opposition (tierce opposition / derdenverzet) challenging the validity of the protective order. After the Brussels Court of First Instance dismissed the third-party opposition, Kazakhstan appealed that decision before the Court of Appeal.

    Read more

Subscribe to our updates

Please select the practice areas you are interested in: *