Costs lie where they fall, but earlier partial award directing Ukraine to reimburse claimant part of the advances on costs remains unaffected

You are not logged in. If you are a subscriber, please Login to access. If you are not a subscriber, you can contact us for a rate quote at subscribe@iareporter.com. Alternatively, you can sign up to receive free email headlines here.

Turkey convincingly proved that Westwater would not have been able to obtain the financing required to advance the project in time – thus the loss of profit was not caused by Turkey’s BIT breaches

Turkey failed to prove that Adur would not have been able to acquire land, obtain necessary approvals and permits, and construct the mine in a timely fashion

Tribunal decides that Turkey would have cancelled the licenses in 2023 and 2024 if Adur had failed to meet the license conditions

Westwater would not have proceeded with the project until uranium prices reached at least 30 USD per pound

Westwater’s market approach is dismissed as being unconvincing

Burden of proving causation can be shifted if claimant proves that the respondent’s BIT breaches caused it financial loss

Tribunal rules that “share swap” valued at 21 million USD through which Westwater acquired Adur cannot be compensated as investment cost – and its merely awards 1.3 million USD in out-of-pocket expenses under the sunk costs approach

Senior government officials created legitimate expectation that Adur’s licenses were valid, and Turkey breached those expectations, in violation of the FET standard

Tribunal sees no arbitrariness, bad faith, or discrimination under the FET standard

Expropriation was unlawful since Turkey failed to pay prompt, adequate and effective compensation – but remaining conditions of lawfulness were met

Revocation of licenses amounted to an indirect expropriation of Westwater’s shares in Adur

Tribunal finds that Adur’s licenses qualified as compensable rights, since they were valid under Turkish law; reasons given for the cancellation were not merely pretextual

Balance of probabilities standard of proof applies to the case’s merits

Westwater was justified in cutting short the negotiation period since further negotiations would have been futile

MFN clause cannot be used to overcome one-year negotiation period

Investment dispute only arose when the licenses were revoked in June 2018

Tribunal upholds jurisdiction ratione materiae, rejecting the idea that only post-acquisition expenditures qualify as contribution of money or assets

Tribunal finds that it is more probable than not that Westwater indirectly owns Adur, which qualifies as a protected investment under the BIT

Background: Turkey decides to cancel uranium mining licenses, stating that they were issued by mistake; parties disagree on method of compensation

Background: Deutsche Bank-owned companies invested in Spanish solar and wind projects shortly before Spain made significant changes to its renewable energy regime

In stern dissent, claimant-appointed arbitrator criticises tribunal’s approach on arbitral precedent and sees Constitutional Amendment as also having motives in breach of BIT

Archives