The Czech Republicv Diag SE & Anor [2025] EWCA Civ 998 (28 July 2025)

The Czech Republicv Diag SE & Anor [2025] EWCA Civ 998 (28 July 2025)

The tribunal had no jurisdiction over Diag Human SE's claim under the BIT, so the award in its favour must be set aside. The award in favour of Mr Stava is severable and stands, as the tribunal had jurisdiction over his claim and his loss was independently established. The costs award is to be maintained in favour...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] EWCA Civ 998
Parties
Claimant/respondent/appellant: The Czech Republic; Defendant/appellant/respondent: Diag Human SE; Defendant/appellant/respondent: Josef Stava
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal From High Court (commercial Court) – Arbitration Act 1996 S.67/s.68 Challenge / Court of Appeal Judgment on Three Consolidated Appeals
Outcome
Appeals by Diag Human SE and Mr Stava dismissed; appeal by Czech Republic allowed in part; award in favour of Diag Human SE set aside; award in favour of Mr Stava confirmed; costs award in favour of Mr Stava maintained; undertakings against double recovery ordered.
Legal Topics
Jurisdictional Challenge Under Arbitration Act 1996 S.67 and S.68, Bilateral Investment Treaty (bit) Arbitration, Severability of Arbitral Awards, Costs in Arbitration, Double Recovery Prevention
Arbitration Commercial Law Investment Treaty Arbitration Jurisdictional Challenge Under Arbitration Act 1996 S.67 and S.68 Bilateral Investment Treaty (bit) Arbitration Severability of Arbitral Awards Costs in Arbitration Double Recovery Prevention

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Czech Republic

Claimant/respondent/appellant

Diag Human SE

Defendant/appellant/respondent

Josef Stava

Defendant/appellant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From High Court (commercial Court) – Arbitration Act 1996 S.67/s.68 Challenge / Court of Appeal Judgment on Three Consolidated Appeals

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitral tribunal had jurisdiction over Diag Human SE's claim under the BIT
  2. 2 Whether the award in favour of Mr Stava is severable from and survives the setting aside of the award in favour of Diag Human SE
  3. 3 Appropriate remedy and costs orders following partial setting aside of the award

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal had no jurisdiction over Diag Human SE's claim under the BIT, so the award in its favour must be set aside. The award in favour of Mr Stava is severable and stands, as the tribunal had jurisdiction over his claim and his loss was independently established. The costs award is to be maintained in favour of Mr Stava, as remission to a new tribunal would be disproportionate. Undertakings by Mr Stava and Diag Human SE prevent double recovery.

Court Disposition

Appeals by Diag Human SE and Mr Stava dismissed; appeal by Czech Republic allowed in part; award in favour of Diag Human SE set aside; award in favour of Mr Stava confirmed; costs award in favour of Mr Stava maintained; undertakings against double recovery ordered.

Orders

  • First Appeal dismissed
  • Second Appeal dismissed