Shearman & Sterling’s International Arbitration team provides advice and advocacy to companies, States and State entities in investment treaty and commercial arbitrations conducted in accordance with all major international arbitration rules. Widely regarded as one of the very best on the market, the team, led by Emmanuel Gaillard, includes more than 100 lawyers fully dedicated to international arbitration.

Because of our strategic view and thorough knowledge of arbitration processes and comparative law, clients turn to us for their most critical matters. We work together with our clients, ahead of and throughout the dispute, to devise and implement a strategy that meets their objectives and leads to the optimal resolution of their thorniest legal problems.

Our clients have described our team as tenacious, dedicated and focused on winning, yet our approach to conflicts is not adversarial. We assemble teams combining technical excellence and industry expertise to fiercely defend the interests of our clients through a clear and cogent written and oral advocacy, without compromising their long-term goals with their business partners. Our lawyers are trained to be attentive to our clients’ needs and expectations, responsive and organized.

We act as counsel in arbitrations worldwide and are able to conduct proceedings in English, French, Arabic, Chinese, Spanish, German, Portuguese, Russian and many other languages. We also appear before national courts to enforce or resist enforcement of international arbitration agreements and arbitral awards. Members of our team also regularly serve as arbitrators or expert witnesses.
M&A仲裁 

Arbitration clauses are now commonplace in contracts organizing cross-border business combinations, such as mergers, acquisitions and joint ventures. Our clients’ disputes in this area typically concern representations and warranties, price adjustment mechanisms and preemption rights. Current and recent cases include the representation of:

  • ArcelorMittal in a dispute with the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The dispute arises from a joint venture for the operation of an iron ore mine.
  • A European life sciences company as Respondent in an arbitration brought by a European chemical company seeking indemnification under a Share Purchase Agreement. The law of the Claimant’s State applies.
  • A senior family member in an ICC arbitration in Geneva related to the dissolution of a long-standing family partnership. Kuwaiti law applies. Billions of dollars are at stake.
  • The Asian founder and the majority shareholder of a NASDAQ listed company as Respondents in an UNCITRAL arbitration administered by the HKIAC in Hong Kong. The dispute arises from a shareholders agreement. New York law governs.
  • A North American company as Claimant in an arbitration under the Swiss Rules of International Arbitration against two European companies. The post-acquisition dispute arises out of breaches of a Share Purchase Agreement and the Respondents’ duty of good faith. German law governs.
  • Thirteen financial investment companies and two individuals as Claimants in an ICC arbitration in Paris against a major European telecommunications company. The dispute related to the revision and breach of a settlement agreement that was previously entered into by the parties in relation to multiple claims brought in several litigation proceedings. Brazilian law applied. Over USD 15 billion was at stake.
  • EDF International as Respondent in an ICC arbitration in Zurich initiated by a company fully-owned by the German Land of Baden-Württemberg. The dispute arose from the acquisition by the Land of EDF's stake in an energy company based in the Land of Baden-Württemberg and raised complex issues of EU law. German law applied.
  • The Dow Chemical Company in an ICC arbitration in London against Petrochemical Industries Company (PIC) arising out of the failure of the latter to close a large M&A transaction. English law applied. Dow was awarded more than USD 2.47 billion. PIC's challenge to the award in the High Court in London, brought under the English Arbitration Act, was rejected, as was PIC's application for leave to appeal.
  • A North Asian company as Respondent in an ICC arbitration in Paris against a North American company. The claim concerned the dissolution of an industrial joint venture. New York law applied.
  • A global asset management company as Claimant in a HKIAC arbitration in Hong Kong against certain founders and shareholders of a company that our client invested in. The dispute arose from an agreement in connection with the investment. Hong Kong law governed.
  • Two European companies as Respondents in an SIAC arbitration in Singapore initiated by a South East Asian company. The dispute, arose from a Share Purchase Agreement subject to Singapore law. The sum in dispute exceeded USD 100 million.  
  • A group of shareholders of a holding company as Respondents in an ICC arbitration in Paris initiated by another shareholder in the same company. The dispute concerned the interpretation of a put option price provision contained in a Shareholders' Agreement. The law of the Netherlands applied. Over USD 500 million was at stake.
  • Three European chemical companies in four ICC arbitrations in Paris and Geneva against European subsidiaries of a large North American chemical concern. The disputes arose from a joint venture agreement formed to manufacture a product used for the production of nylon, as well as from a related confidentiality agreement and the resulting settlement agreement entered by the parties to settle a previous dispute.
  • A major European retail group as Claimant in an ICC arbitration in São Paulo against its Brazilian joint venture partner. The dispute concerned breaches of a shareholders’ agreement concluded between the parties relating to the control of Brazil’s largest retailer. Brazilian law applied.
仲裁の執行 

Practice

We assist our clients in all aspects of the post-award phase, including in settlement negotiations, global asset tracing and in enforcement and set-aside proceedings.

We act on behalf of private and public entities as well as sovereigns, be they award creditors or debtors, with respect to awards rendered in both commercial and investment treaty arbitrations.  We also act in enforcement proceedings involving third parties in possession of award debtors’ assets.

We are widely recognized for our intellectual leadership in the field of international arbitration. With respect to enforcement, over 20 members of our team contributed to the New York Convention Project, a joint research project undertaken with UNCITRAL and Columbia University. The Project led to the publication of the UNCITRAL Secretariat Guide on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards (co-authored by Emmanuel Gaillard, head of our International Arbitration Group) and its online platform, newyorkconvention1958.org, which notably contains over 1700 decisions from national courts throughout the world.

Experience

  • The majority shareholders in the former Yukos Oil Company | in proceedings initiated by the Russian Federation before the Dutch courts to set aside the US$50 billion awards rendered in the arbitrations brought by the shareholders against the Russian Federation concerning the expropriation of their investments in Yukos. We also advise the Yukos majority shareholders in proceedings for the enforcement of these awards in multiple jurisdictions.
  • Tata Sons Ltd. | as award debtor in proceedings brought before U.S. courts by Japanese telecoms company NTT DoCoMo to seek enforcement of a US$ 1.17 billion award rendered in an LCIA arbitration.
  • Defeated the Republic of Hungary’s application| before Swiss courts to see the annulment of a 107 million award secured by EDF International in an investment treaty arbitration.
  • The Dow Chemical Company | in proceedings initiated before the High Court in London by Petrochemical Industries Company (PIC) to challenge a US$2 billion award we secured for our client. The application, brought under the English Arbitration Act, was rejected, as was PIC's application for leave to appeal.
  • The Republic of Lithuania | in proceedings before Swedish courts to set aside an award rendered against it by an SCC Tribunal in a dispute against OAO Gazprom.
  • Mr. Viorel Micula | in proceedings initiated by the Republic of Romania before an ICSID ad hoc committee for the annulment of the US$250 million award and in subsequent enforcement proceedings in multiple jurisdictions (including the United States, the United Kingdom and France) of the award.
建設 

Practice
We represent owners and contractors in international construction and engineering arbitrations arising from projects throughout the world, under a wide variety of applicable laws. Our principal focus is on high value, complex multi-claim disputes concerning power projects (nuclear, hydroelectric and renewable), oil and gas facilities, industrial plants and civil infrastructure projects. 

Experience

  • GAS LIQUEFACTION PLANT | Africa
    An African energy company in an ICC arbitration in Geneva brought by a European energy company and its African subsidiary. The dispute arose from a contract for the construction of gas liquefaction facilities. The law of the respondent's state applies. Over €2.6 billion is at stake.
  • MEDICAL FACILITY | Middle East
    Two international construction contractors in an ICC arbitration in London initiated by a Middle Eastern state-owned company. The dispute concerns the development of a world-class medical facility in the Middle East. The law of the claimant's state applies. US$2 billion is at stake.
  • NUCLEAR POWER PLANT | Europe
    A French-German consortium in an ICC arbitration in Stockholm against a Finnish utility company. The dispute arises from an agreement for the construction of a nuclear power plant in Finland. 
    Finnish law governs. Over €6.1 billion is at stake.
  • CIVIL INFRASTRUCTURE | Middle East
    An international contractor consortium in an ICC arbitration against a Middle Eastern state. The dispute arose from a contract for the construction of a major infrastructure project in the Middle East. The law of the respondent state applies. Over US$700 million is at stake.
  • SOLAR FIELD | Middle East
    A European energy infrastructure company in an ICC arbitration in London brought against a North American subcontractor. The dispute arose out of a project for the construction of a major solar field in the Middle East. Issues included defective equipment and critical delays in the overall project. English law applied.
  • MINING | Africa Two African subsidiaries of an international mining and exploration company in an ICC arbitration in London initiated by a South African contractor. The dispute arises from an EPCM contract in relation to a mine expansion project in Sub-Saharan Africa.  English law applies.
  • REFINERY | Latin America A state-owned Latin American oil and gas company as respondent in an ICC arbitration against a contractor involving the expansion of a refinery. The seat of arbitration is The Hague.
  • URBAN DEVELOPMENT | Europe
    A Turkish construction company as claimant in an ICC arbitration in Switzerland against a Russian developer. The dispute arose from a contract for the development of a multifunctional retail and office complex in Moscow. English law applied.
  • PETROCHEMICAL PLANT | Asia
    An Asian state-owned entity and its subsidiaries as lead counsel in a dispute subject to UNCITRAL arbitration in Stockholm against a state-owned entity in a Central Asian state. The dispute arises from an agreement for the construction of an oil and gas plant on a turnkey (EPC) basis.
  • ROAD & WATER PROJECT | Africa
    The Republic of Mozambique as espondent in a dispute before a Dispute Adjudication Board involving the allegedbreach of a FIDIC contract governing the construction of road and water projects. The law of Mozambique applied.
エネルギー仲裁 

"Team of stellar individuals with expertise in the fields of energy and natural resources, as well as construction and IP disputes."
―Chambers Global, 2016

We have extensive experience across the energy sector, including oil & gas matters (upstream and downstream), nuclear power, hydroelectric power, and renewable energy, in which we have acted for multinational corporations, Sovereign States and State-owned companies. We often appear in disputes concerning, inter alia, issues of consortium and joint-venture relations, contract cancellations and terminations, construction of power plants, price review, tax treatment and stabilization. We are also recognized as a market leader on the Energy Charter Treaty (see our investment arbitration experience). Current and recent cases handled by Shearman & Sterling’s international arbitration group include the representation of:

  • Five gas importers as Respondents in SCC and UNCITRAL arbitrations in Stockholm initiated by an upstream supplier. The disputes arise from a gas price revision clause in long-term supply contracts. Swedish law applies.
  • Nine Asian Independent Power Producers (IPPs) as Claimants in an LCIA arbitration seated in London against a State-owned entity. The dispute arises out the non-payment of certain amounts under Power Purchase Agreements concluded between the IPPs and a State-owned entity. The law of the Respondent’s State applies.
  • Sonatrach as 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.
  • A European energy company, seller in a long-term gas supply agreement, as Respondent in a gas price review arbitration brought by another European energy company (as buyer). Algerian law applied. Over USD 1.3 billion was at stake.
  • Egyptian Natural Gas Holding Company (EGAS) and Egyptian General Petroleum Corporation (EGPC) as Respondents in an ICC arbitration in Geneva brought by East Mediterranean Gas S.A.E. (EMG), arising out of a long term gas supply contract between EGAS, EGPC and EMG.
  • An African energy company as 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.
  • The Republic of Lithuania as Claimant in an SCC arbitration in Stockholm against Gazprom, in relation to Gazprom’s obligations to supply gas based on fair prices under the Share Sale and Purchase Agreement between Lithuania and Gazprom as well as Gazprom’s breaches of its obligations under the Shareholders’ Agreement, resulting in overpayments in excess of EUR 1.54 billion.
  • A European energy company and its Central European affiliate as Respondents in an ICC arbitration in Paris initiated by a Southeastern Europe energy company. The dispute arose from an agreement for the privatization of a State-owned electricity company. The law of the Claimant’s State applied.
  • A Southeast Asian State-owned company as Respondent in an ICC arbitration in Singapore initiated by three European and Australasian energy companies. The dispute arose from a production-sharing agreement.
  • An African State-owned energy producer as Respondent in an UNCITRAL arbitration in Geneva initiated by the African subsidiary of a large North American energy company. The dispute arose from an unitization agreement in relation to a petroleum field. The law of the Respondent's State applied. Hundreds of millions of US dollars were at stake.
  • The African subsidiary of a European energy company in an ICC arbitration in Paris against an African State. The dispute related to local tax claims.
  • An Egyptian State-owned entity in an ICC arbitration in Stockholm arising from an oil concession. Egyptian law applied.
  • Subsidiaries of a leading European renewable energy company as Claimants in an ICC arbitration initiated against a Latin American energy company in relation to the sale of a wind farm project in Latin America. The seat of the arbitration was Montevideo, Uruguay, and Argentine law applied.
  • A North African energy company as Respondent in an UNCITRAL arbitration in Geneva initiated by two large energy companies. The dispute was in relation to the interpretation of contractual provisions regarding future taxes imposed on the foreign partner and tax stabilization provisions in the context of a production sharing contract. Over 11 billion US dollars was at stake. A settlement was achieved.
  • The African subsidiary of a major European energy company as Claimant in an ad hoc arbitration in Paris against an African State. The dispute concerned the treatment of decommissioning costs for existing fields (whether inshore or offshore), and more specifically whether these costs constituted petroleum costs to be shared among the parties under the production-sharing agreement and whether monies should be set aside in order to cover those future expenses.
  • A West African energy company as Respondent in an UNCITRAL arbitration in Geneva initiated by a European energy company. The dispute arose from the revision of a price formula in two long term contracts for the sales of liquefied natural gas. English law applied and the language of the proceedings was English.
金融と保険 

Our clients increasingly ask us to represent them in their financial and insurance disputes. We have handled arbitrations concerning bank recapitalizations and loans, as well as reinsurance and political risk insurance policies. Arbitrations in the financial and insurance sectors include the representation of:

  • A Middle Eastern private equity firm | in a dispute regarding intercompany loan transactions. The dispute was subject to LCIA arbitration and English law applies.
  • The Respondent | in an ICC arbitration brought by the seller and beneficiary of a guarantee in a commercial transaction. The dispute related to obligations under a guarantee agreement and underlying loan agreements. New York law applied. The seat of arbitration was New York.
  • A Cypriot company as Claimant | in two LCIA arbitrations in London against the borrower and the guarantor in a USD 1.6 billion loan to a leading Russian oil and gas company. The Claimant sought payment of the unpaid balance of all sums owing under the loan agreement. English law applied. The amount at stake in these arbitrations was in excess of USD 650 million (without interest). An award was rendered in favor of our client.
  • Two banks | in an ICC arbitration in New York, in which three banks had brought a claim against the Republic of Uruguay in connection with the breach by the Republic of a release, a covenant not to sue and an arbitration clause in an agreement among the parties. The Respondent counterclaimed for approximately USD 650 million. The case arose out of the collapse of the Uruguayan banking industry in 2002.
  • An Asia-Pacific life insurance company | as Respondent in an ICC arbitration in New York against an Asian Government entity. The dispute arose from the sale of an Asian life insurance company. The opponent’s national law applied. The amount at stake was in excess of USD 1 billion. All claims against our client were withdrawn.
  • Credit Suisse and Dresdner | in an ICC arbitration in New York, in which three banks brought a claim against the Republic of Uruguay with respect to a transaction in which the Claimants had participated in the recapitalization of a commercial bank in Uruguay. Over USD 100 million was at stake.
  • A North American reinsurance intermediary | as both a Respondent and a Claimant in multiple ad hoc arbitrations in New York and New Jersey against many international insurance companies. The dispute concerned liability of various parties with respect to obligations arising from a complex international reinsurance pool arrangement. The amount at stake was in hundreds of millions of dollars. An award was rendered in favor of our client in the lead case. Other cases were thereafter settled on confidential terms.
  • A North American bank | against a North American insurance company. The dispute arose out of political risk insurance policy with respect to a loan for a toll road in a Latin American country. A favorable award was obtained by our client.
商事仲裁 

We represent clients from many business sectors in their commercial disputes, notably matters arising from sales, supply, distribution and agency agreements. Current and recent cases include the representation of:

  • A Middle Eastern company | in an ICC arbitration in Doha against a Middle Eastern energy company. The dispute arises from a gas supply agreement. Qatari law applies.
  • A global chemical company | as Claimant in an ICC arbitration in Hong Kong against a North Asian rechargeable batteries manufacturer. The dispute arose from a Technology Transfer Agreement. The dispute is governed by New York and Korean law.
  • An Asian oil & gas company | in an arbitration in Stockholm under the SCC Rules against a European chemical company. The dispute arose under a technology transfer agreement. It also involves joint venture-related issues. Swedish law applies.
  • A North American agro-sciences company | as Claimant and counterclaim respondent in AAA arbitration in Illinois against a plant breeding company regarding the alleged breach of a collaborative research and development agreement. Approximately USD 400 million was at stake. Illinois law applied.
  • A European subsidiary of North American company | in the defense industry, in an arbitration under the aegis of Lisbon Commercial Association/Arbitration Centre of the Portuguese Chamber of Commerce and Industry. The dispute concerned the termination of a series of contracts related to the supply of defense equipment. Portuguese law applied and the seat of arbitration was Lisbon.
  • A European manufacturing company | as Claimant in an ICC arbitration brought against a US law firm. The dispute concerned the Respondent's liability for damages incurred by our client as a result of the Respondent's advice provided in the course of a patent litigation before the US International Trade Commission (ITC).
  • A Central American subsidiary of a leading European energy company | in a dispute with a large multinational manufacturer relating to the supply of diesel generators to be incorporated in a heavy fuel oil-fired power plant. Swiss law applied and the dispute was subject to ICC arbitration in Geneva.
  • Various entities of a major beverage company | in two ICC arbitrations in Paris against a service provider. The first arbitration arose from a settlement agreement and the second arbitration arose from a supply agreement. Both cases raised complex procedural issues in the context of multiparty multicontract arbitrations. French law applied.
  • Subsidiaries of a leading European renewable energy company | as Claimants in an ICC arbitration initiated against a Latin American energy company in relation to the sale of a wind farm project in Latin America. The seat of the arbitration was Montevideo, Uruguay and Argentine law applied.
  • A prominent French global fashion label | as 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. Singapore law applied.
知的財産仲裁 

Shearman & Sterling’s International Arbitration Group frequently represents clients experiencing disputes relating to intellectual property rights. Current and recent experience includes the representation of:

  • A German manufacturing company as Claimant in an ICC arbitration brought against a US law firm. The dispute concerned the Respondent's liability for damages incurred by our client as a result of the Respondent's advice provided in the course of a patent litigation before the US International Trade Commission (ITC).
  • A North American agribusiness company | as Respondent in an ICC arbitration initiated by European agribusiness companies. The dispute related to a license agreement and patents relating to technologies for the genetic modification of plants. French law applied.
  • A European pharmaceutical company | as Claimant in an ICC arbitration in Paris against three subsidiaries of a global health care company. The dispute arose from a price-adjustment payment made under a Manufacturing Right Purchase and License Agreement. French law applied.
  • Two European chemical companies | as Respondents in an ad hoc arbitration in Geneva brought by a European subsidiary of a North American chemical company. The dispute arose out of the filing of patents alleged to constitute misappropriation of confidential information in breach of a confidentiality agreement between the parties. Swiss law applied.
  • Two affiliated European chemical companies | as Respondents in an ICC arbitration in Geneva brought by the European subsidiaries of a North American chemical company. The dispute related to allegedly unauthorized use/disclosure of information relating to the manufacture of a chemical intermediate required for the production of nylon. Swiss law applied and the language of the proceedings was English.
  • A prominent French global fashion label | as 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. Singapore law applied.
短期的・恒久的措置 
An important aspect of international arbitration is the availability of interim and conservatory relief in support of the arbitral process. This relief includes injunctions, attachments designed to promote the enforceability of a subsequent award, and orders preserving evidence. We represent clients seeking these measures before both courts and arbitral tribunals.
投資仲裁 

"Clients describe the team's output as ‘the pinnacle of excellence.’"
―Chambers Global, 2017

We have been at the heart of some of the most groundbreaking investment treaty arbitrations over the past 30 years, acting as counsel, arbitrator and legal expert in such disputes. We stand apart from other firms for our ability to effectively address highly complex issues of investment arbitration and international law, both regarding questions of jurisdiction and admissibility, and those going to the substantive protection offered by bilateral and multilateral investment treaties.

Our experience comprises an equal balance of mandates on behalf of states and investors. Representative matters include:

Representation of States

  • Omega Engineering et al. v. Republic of Panama (ICSID Case No. ARB/16/42) Pending dispute related to infrastructure construction projects. Claims brought under both the U.S.-Panama bilateral investment treaty and trade promotion agreement.
  • Veolia Environnement  v. Republic of Lithuania (ICSID Case No. ARB/16/3) Pending dispute related to district heating and power generation systems. Claims are brought under the Lithuania-France bilateral investment treaty.
  • Emergofin  and Velbay Holdings  v. Ukraine (ICSID Case No. ARB/16/35) Pending dispute related to an aluminium and alumina production company. The claims are brought under the Netherlands-Ukraine bilateral investment treaty.
  • Georg Gavrilovic and Gavrilovic d.o.o. v. Republic of Croatia (ICSID Case No. ARB/12/39) Pending dispute related to a food products enterprise. The claims are brought under the Austria-Croatia bilateral investment treaty.
  • Orascom TMT Investments S.à.r.l. v. People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria (ICSID Case No. ARB/12/35) Securing the dismissal of US$4 billion claims brought against the Algerian Republic. The dispute related to the operation of a mobile telephone company in Algeria, and the claims were brought under the Algeria-Belgium-Luxembourg bilateral investment treaty.

Representation of Investors

  • Cairn Energy  v. Republic of India (UNCITRAL case) Pending dispute related to retrospective tax measures adopted by the Indian government. Claims brought under the U.K.-India bilateral investment treaty. Over US$5.5 billion is at stake.
  • Leading European energy group v. Kingdom of Spain (UNCITRAL case) Pending dispute related to measures taken by Spain in the renewable energy sector. Claims brought under the Energy Charter Treaty.
  • Majority shareholders in the former Yukos Oil Company v. Russian Federation (UNCITRAL cases) Securing a US$50 billion award in favor of our clients, the largest award ever rendered by an arbitral tribunal. The dispute related to the expropriation of our clients’ investment in Yukos Oil Company. Claims brought under the Energy Charter Treaty.
  • EDF International v. Republic of Hungary (UNCITRAL case) Securing an award in favor of EDF International in a dispute arising from the termination of Power Purchase Agreements put in place during Hungary’s privatization of the electricity sector. Claims brought under the Energy Charter Treaty.
  • SAUR International v. Argentine Republic (ICSID Case No. ARB/04/4) Securing an award in favor of SAUR and the denial of a subsequent application for annulment by the Argentine Republic, in a dispute related to a water and sewer services concession. Claims brought under the France–Argentina bilateral investment treaty.