EXPERTISE

Key Contacts

Investor-State Dispute Settlement

Tereposky & DeRose’s investor-state dispute settlement team brings together lawyers and professionals who have extensive experience acting as counsel or senior advisors to governments in over 30 investment treaty arbitrations. Since our firm was established, we have defended individual damages claims that exceed USD 1 billion dollars.

Members of our team have acted as counsel to the Government of Mexico in its investor-state arbitrations since 1997. They have also advised on the negotiation and implementation of bilateral and plurilateral investment protection treaties and the application of international investment obligations with respect to, inter alia, public-private partnerships, health services, telecom services, mining (land and undersea), casinos, hotels and tourism, waste management, and cultural industries.

We understand the complexities of international investment law and the forces that have shaped its evolution over the past two decades. Our lawyers’ experience began during the early stages of development of this law and extends to the most recent developments introduced in the Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) and the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP).

Our lawyers also represent the Government of Mexico in judicial applications to set-aside arbitral awards before Canadian courts.

Our experience in analyzing investment rights, obligations and procedures forms the foundation from which we represent our clients in investment matters.

Tereposky & DeRose lawyers have appeared as counsel to the Government of Mexico in numerous arbitrations under NAFTA Chapter Eleven and CUSMA Chapter Fourteen, including:

  • Coeur Mining v. The United Mexican States
  • First Majestic Silver Corp. v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB/21/14
  • Finley Resources, Inc., MWS Management, Inc., and Prize Permanent Holdings, LLC. v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB/21/25
  • L1bero Partners LP/Espiritu Santos Technologies LLC v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB/20/13
  • Odyssey Marine Exploration Inc. on their own behalf and on behalf of Exploraciones Oceanicas S. de R.L. de C.V. v. The United Mexican States, UNCT/20/1
  • Legacy Vulcan LLC v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB/19/1
  • Alicia Grace and Others v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. UNCT/18/4
  • B-Mex LLC. and Others v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/16/3
  • Vento Motorcycles, Inc. v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/17/3
  • Joshua Dean Nelson et al v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. UNCT/17/1
  • Lion Mexico Consolidated LP v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/15/2
  • KBR, Inc v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. UNCT/14/1
  • Cargill, Inc. v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/05/2
  • Archer Daniels Midland et al v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. ARB (AF)/04/5
  • Corn Products International v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. ARB (AF)/04/1
  • Bayview Irrigation District et al v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/05/1
  • Fireman’s Fund Insurance Co. v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/02/1
  • International Thunderbird Gaming Corp v. Mexico, UNCITRAL
  • GAMI Investments Inc. v. Mexico, UNCITRAL
  • Waste Management Inc v. Mexico (II), ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/00/3
  • Marvin Roy Feldman v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/99/1 (also known as Marvin Feldman v. Mexico)
  • Waste Management Inc. v. Mexico (I), ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/98/2
  • Metalclad Corporation v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/97/1
  • Robert Azinian et al v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. ARB (AF)/97/2

Our lawyers have appeared as counsel to the Government of Mexico under other bilateral investment treaties, including:

  • Consolidated Water Coöperative, U.A. v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB/22/6
  • Coöperative Rabobank U.A. v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB/20/23
  • Tralje International Finance, B.V. (Tralje) v. The United Mexican States
  • Terence Highlands v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB/19/26
  • PACC Offshore Services Holding Ltd. v. The United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. UNCT/18/5
  • Shanara Maritime International S.A. and Marfield Ltd. Inc. v. The United Mexican States, UNCITRAL
  • Contecon Manzanillo S.A. de C.V. v. The United Mexican States
  • Carlos Sastre and Others v. United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. UNCT/20/2
  • Eutelsat S.A. v. United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/17/2
  • Telefonica S.A. v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/12/4
  • Abengoa, S.A. v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/09/2
  • Gemplus S.A. v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/04/3
  • Talsud S.A. v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/04/4
  • Técnicas Medioambientales S.A. (Tecmed) v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. ARB (AF)/00/2

Our lawyers have acted as advisors to Mexico as an intervener on questions of interpretation of the NAFTA, including:

  • Resolute Forest Products v. Canada, PCA Case No. 2016-13
  • Eli Lilly & Company v. Canada, ICSID Case No. UNCT/14/2
  • Windstream Energy LLC v. Canada, PCA Case No. 2013-22
  • Mercer International Inc v. Canada, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/12/3
  • Merrill & Ring Forestry LP v. Canada, ICSID Case No. UNCT/07/1
  • United Parcel Service of America, Inc. v. Canada, ICSID Case No. UNCT/02/1
  • D. Myers, Inc v. Canada, UNCITRAL
  • Pope & Talbot, Inc. v. Canada, UNCITRAL
  • Ethyl Corporation v. Canada, UNCITRAL

Our lawyers have also acted as counsel of record to the Government of Mexico in the following proceedings to set aside arbitral awards:

  • Joshua Dean Nelson v. The United Mexican States, No. CV-21-00663626-00CL
  • Vento Motorcycles, Inc. v. The United Mexican States, No. CV-20-006496640000
  • United Mexican States v. Karpa, 2003 CanLII 34011 (ON SC)

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

we respect your Privacy Policy and take protecting it seriously