Library
An archive of the key court rulings in the Tristangate dispute.
The Stati Parties Secure an Arbitral Award Requiring Kazakhstan to Pay Compensation of More Than US$ 500 million
The Tribunal holds that Kazakhstan has violated its obligations under the ECT and awards the Stati Parties damages of approximately US$ 500 million, plus costs and interest.
In its 414-page reasoned award the Tribunal holds that:
“[Kazakhstan’s] measures, seen cumulatively in context to each other and compared with the treatment of the Claimants’ investments before the Order of the President of the Republic [Nursultan Nazabayev] on 14/16 October 2008, constituted a string of measures of coordinated harassment by various institutions of [Kazakhstan]. These measures must be considered as a breach of the obligation to treat investors fairly and equitably, as required by Art 10(1) ECT”.
Search Our Library
Kazakhstan files a civil complaint in New York against Argentem Creek Partners and its CEO, alleging that they had been involved in a criminal conspiracy together with the Stati Parties.
The Swedish Supreme Court upholds the award for the second time, dismissing Kazakhstan’s application to overturn the December 9, 2016 ruling of the Svea Court of Appeal filed on the basis of alleged new evidence. The award is therefore once again confirmed to be final, binding and non-appealable for all intents and purposes.
The High Court of Justice in London rejects NBK’s US$ 530 million debt claim against BNY Mellon for the latter’s refusal to release the National Fund assets frozen as a result of the parallel Belgian enforcement proceedings, by agreeing with the Stati Parties that the decision with regards to BNY Mellon is to be determined by the Belgian courts in due course.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit confirms the lower district court ruling from March 30, 2019 which dismissed Kazakhstan’s RICO claim against the Stati Parties.
The Svea Court of Appeal in Sweden dismisses Kazakhstan’s second challenge of the award filed on the basis of alleged new evidence. The award is therefore again confirmed to be final, binding and non-appealable for all intents and purposes.