Republic of Kazakhstan v Istil Group Inc

Republic of Kazakhstan v Istil Group Inc

The arbitral tribunal lacked substantive jurisdiction because ROK was not a party to the contracts or arbitration agreements, and the French court's judgment created an issue estoppel precluding jurisdiction; the final award must be set aside.

Parties
Claimant: The Republic of Kazakhstan; Defendant: Istil Group Inc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 April 2006
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Arbitral Award / Judgment
Outcome
final award set aside for want of substantive jurisdiction
Legal Topics
Substantive Jurisdiction, Universal Succession, Res Judicata, Sovereign Immunity, Party Status in Arbitration
Arbitration Commercial Law Company Law Substantive Jurisdiction Universal Succession Res Judicata Sovereign Immunity Party Status in Arbitration

Case Brief

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Republic of Kazakhstan

Claimant

Istil Group Inc

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Arbitral Award / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitral tribunal had substantive jurisdiction over the dispute between Istil and ROK
  2. 2 Whether the partial award was a nullity due to merger and dissolution of claimant companies
  3. 3 Whether ROK was a party to the contracts or arbitration agreements

Ratio Decidendi

The arbitral tribunal lacked substantive jurisdiction because ROK was not a party to the contracts or arbitration agreements, and the French court's judgment created an issue estoppel precluding jurisdiction; the final award must be set aside.

Court Disposition

final award set aside for want of substantive jurisdiction

Orders

  • The final award of the LCIA dated 1 June 2004 is set aside.