Library
An archive of the key court rulings in the Tristangate dispute.
KAZAKHSTAN’S ALLEGATIONS AGAINST ARGENTEM CREEK PARTNERS DISMISSED AS “IMPERMISSIBLE COLLATERAL ATTACK” ON ARBITRATION AWARD
The Supreme Court of the State of New York granted a motion to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the Republic of Kazakhstan against Daniel Chapman and New York-based investment firm Argentem Creek Partners.
Since December 2013, Kazakhstan has refused to pay and instead adopted a multijurisdictional legal strategy designed to frustrate the Award and avoid compliance with its binding international treaty obligations.
As part of these efforts, in June 2020 Kazakhstan filed a lawsuit in the United States against Daniel Chapman and Argentem Creek Partners, alleging that Argentem Creek Partners’ financing of attempts to enforce the Award constituted fraud. On August 29 2022, Judge Andrew Borrok of the Supreme Court State of New York granted a motion to dismiss this lawsuit.
Search Our Library
The federal district court in Washington, D.C. rules that the award is valid and enforceable as a binding U.S. judgment following an application by the Stati Parties to confirm the Award on U.S. soil. In doing so, the U.S. court rejects the fraud allegations brought forward by Kazakhstan.
The Stockholm District Court upholds its previous decision from August 21, 2017 allowing the Swedish bailiff to levy attachments on Kazakh state property on Swedish soil by dismissing Kazakhstan’s challenges to the original ruling.
The Amsterdam District Court dismisses a challenge by Samruk-Kazyna against the freeze over the Kashagan oil field.
The Swedish Supreme Court upholds the award for the first time and rejects Kazakhstan’s extraordinary review application against the Svea Court of Appeal judgment from December 9, 2016.
The Brussels Court of First Instance makes an attachment order as sought by Stati Parties. The said order was served on BNY Mellon as global custodian of Kazakhstan’s National Fund assets leading to BNY Mellon freezing US$ 22.6 billion in assets of the National Fund (comprising about 40% of the Fund’s entire portfolio).
This attachment is believed to be the largest in legal history.