What is Locus Standi?

Locus Standi is a platform for the dispute-resolution world. It brings together arbitration, mediation and adjudication events, jobs and internships, and landmark arbitral awards explained in plain English, alongside the qualifications and pathways into the field. It was established in London at LIDW26 by the alumni of Queen Mary University of London.

Can Locus Standi help me understand a dispute?

Yes. Locus Standi offers free dispute help: paste your contract's dispute-resolution clause and a short note on what happened, and it works out the type of dispute, the governing law, your options, the right forum to file in, and drafts a basic document to start from, all in plain English.

What is the agentic AI case officer?

Locus Standi's workspace includes an AI case officer that helps practitioners run their matters: tracking stages and deadlines, raising alerts, organising to-dos and documents, and drafting. It is built for arbitrators, mediators and the institutions that administer disputes.

Where can I find arbitration events and internships?

Locus Standi keeps a live calendar of arbitration, mediation and adjudication events with one-tap calendar export, and a board of arbitration jobs and internships from institutions including the PCA, ICC, LCIA, SCC, SIAC and AIAC.

Deutsche Bank AG v. Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka (ICSID)

Why it matters

This award is a landmark for its detailed analysis of whether a hedging agreement constitutes an investment under the ICSID Convention and a BIT. It also addresses attribution of state entity acts, the scope of fair and equitable treatment, and the umbrella clause. The tribunal's finding that Sri Lanka acted in bad faith and its award of full costs to the claimant underscore the consequences of state interference with contractual rights.

Summary

Deutsche Bank AG, a German bank, entered into an oil hedging agreement with Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (CPC), Sri Lanka's state-owned oil company, on July 8, 2008. The agreement was designed to protect CPC against rising oil prices. After oil prices fell, CPC faced large payment obligations. Sri Lanka's Supreme Court issued an interim order preventing CPC from making payments, and the Central Bank issued a stop-payment order, effectively terminating the agreement. Deutsche Bank initiated ICSID arbitration under the Germany-Sri Lanka BIT, claiming violations of fair and equitable treatment, expropriation, full protection and security, and the umbrella clause. The tribunal (majority) found that the hedging agreement constituted an investment under both the BIT and the ICSID Convention, rejecting Sri Lanka's jurisdictional objections. On the merits, the tribunal held that Sri Lanka's actions, including the Supreme Court order and Central Bank investigation, were arbitrary, lacked due process, and were taken in bad faith, violating fair and equitable treatment. It also found that the measures amounted to indirect expropriation. The tribunal awarded Deutsche Bank USD 60,368,993 in damages plus interest, and ordered Sri Lanka to pay all of Deutsche Bank's legal costs. One arbitrator dissented on jurisdiction and merits.

The detail

Parties: Deutsche Bank AG v. Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka

Case number: ICSID Case No. ARB/09/2

Outcome: Sri Lanka violated fair and equitable treatment and expropriation provisions; ordered to pay USD 60,368,993 plus interest and costs.

Quantum: USD 60,368,993

Applicable law: Germany-Sri Lanka BIT (2000); ICSID Convention; Sri Lankan law

Issues in play: The tribunal considered whether a hedging agreement qualified as an investment under the BIT and ICSID Convention, and whether Sri Lanka's actions (including a Supreme Court interim order and Central Bank stop-payment order) breached fair and equitable treatment and expropriation standards.

Read the full decision at italaw ↗

Locus Standi links to the source decision and publishes its own plain-language summary. It does not reproduce the text of the award.

Back to the awards board