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.

 

Download

Search Our Library

The Brussels Court of Appeal upholds challenge brought by Kazakhstan

Date: November 16, 2021
Jurisdiction: Belgium
Status: Closed

The Brussels Court of Appeal issued a decision upholding the challenge brought by Kazakhstan against the enforcement of the $545 million Energy Charter Treaty Award in Belgium. The ruling is limited to the Belgian jurisdiction only and did not affect the validity of the award in Sweden.

Download

Washington D.C. District Court petition for Kazakhstan’s former Embassy property

Date: July 19, 2021
Jurisdiction: U.S.
Status: Open

The Stati Parties petitioned the Washington D.C. federal district court for an emergency attachment of the former residence of the Republic of Kazakhstan’s ambassador in the District of Columbia, arguing that it is now used for commercial rather than diplomatic purposes.

The relief sought is in response to Kazakhstan’s continued refusal to honour the fully adjudicated US$556 Million Tristangate Award that was issued by a Swedish arbitration tribunal in 2013.

The property is presently rented out to a translation school and a remodelling company on a commercial basis, according to a filing by the Stati parties, and therefore no longer protected by sovereign immunity.

The motion asks for an order that the property cannot be sold for the next 180 days and, if the property were to be sold that the proceeds are paid into a designated court escrow account.

Download the Emergency Attachment Petition

Lawyers for Argentem Creek Partners re-file a motion to dismiss

Date: July 15, 2021
Jurisdiction: U.S.
Status: Open

Lawyers for Argentem Creek Partners have re-filed a motion to dismiss, following Republic of Kazakhstan’s decision to amend their original complaint last month.

Download

Brussels Court of Appeal rejects Kazakhstan’s challenge to $530 million attachment order

Date: June 29, 2021
Jurisdiction: Belgium
Status: Closed

The Brussels Court of Appeal has rejected Kazakhstan’s challenge to a $530 million attachment of assets held via its National Fund with BNY Mellon in Brussels.

The asset attachment, originally at a value of $22.6 billion, is an enforcement measure against Kazakhstan’s continued failure to pay more than $500 million awarded to the Stati Parties by a Swedish arbitral tribunal in 2013. The Stati Parties later agreed to limit the attachment to $530 million, reflecting the approximate value of the Energy Charter Award at the time. The attachment value has since grown with interest to over $540 million.

Download English Translation
Download Original Dutch Ruling

Amsterdam District Court denies National Bank of Kazakhstan claim for damages

Date: June 23, 2021
Jurisdiction: Netherlands
Status: Closed

The Amsterdam District Court denied a $118 million damages claim brought by the National Bank of Kazakhstan (NBK) against the Stati Parties.

NBK claimed it had suffered severe losses after rulings in a Dutch court and a Belgian court in 2017 led to the attachment of sovereign assets held by BNY Mellon worth $22.6 billion.

The court dismissed the claim in its entirety, arguing that “in this case there is no question of an unlawful attachment leading to risk liability,” and that “it cannot be held that the Stati parties abused their powers”. It also ordered NBK to cover the Statis’ legal costs.

Download English Translation
Download Dutch Original