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.

Iurii Bogdanov, Agurdino-Invest Ltd. and Agurdino-Chimia JSC v. Republic of Moldova, SCC (SCC)

Why it matters

This early SCC investment award clarifies that shareholders may claim indirect damages for losses suffered by their local subsidiaries, and that a restriction on compensation shares can violate fair and equitable treatment even if it does not amount to expropriation. It also illustrates the limits of treaty protection for locally incorporated companies.

Summary

The case arose from a privatization contract under which a Moldovan company (Agurdino-Invest) transferred assets to the state in exchange for shares in state-owned companies. The state later restricted the list of eligible compensation shares, making the compensation worthless. The Russian investor, Iurii Bogdanov, brought a claim under the Russia-Moldova BIT. The tribunal found that it had jurisdiction over the foreign investor but not over the local companies. It held that the retroactive application of the restriction violated the BIT's fair and equitable treatment standard. However, it rejected claims of indirect expropriation because the loss was only 7% of the investment. The tribunal awarded damages of 694,896 lei (principal plus interest) and ordered Moldova to pay all arbitration costs. The award is notable for its discussion of shareholder protection and indirect damages in investment arbitration.

The detail

Parties: Iurii Bogdanov, Agurdino-Invest Ltd. and Agurdino-Chimia JSC v. Republic of Moldova, SCC

Case number: italaw/cases/168

Outcome: The tribunal ordered Moldova to pay damages of 694,896 lei to the investor, plus interest, and to bear all arbitration costs.

Quantum: 694,896 lei

Applicable law: Russia-Moldova BIT (1998), Moldovan Civil Code, SCC Arbitration Rules

Issues in play: The principle of non-retroactivity of legislation (Moldovan Foreign Investment Act) vs. the state's right to regulate compensation shares under privatization contracts.

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