Windstream Energy, a U.S.-based energy corporation, challenged Canada over the company's inability to participate in Ontario's green energy program -- the same one targeted by Mesa Power Group (above). The corporation had contracted with Ontario's provincial government to provide energy generated by an offshore wind farm located in Lake Ontario. But in February 2011, the provincial government declared a moratorium on offshore wind production, stating that time was needed to study the environmental impacts of the relatively new energy source (currently there are only a few freshwater offshore wind farms in the world).
Windstream's notice alleged that the moratorium "effectively annulled the existing regulatory framework" and thus contravened Canada's NAFTA obligations concerning "fair and equitable treatment," expropriation, and discrimination. Pending, asking $457 Million
Indiana-based Eli Lilly, the fifth-largest U.S. pharmaceutical corporation, challenged Canada's patent standards after Canadian courts invalidated the company's patents for Strattera and Zyprexa, drugs used to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Canadian federal courts ruled that Eli Lilly had failed to demonstrate or soundly predict that the drugs would provide the benefits that the company promised when applying for the patents' monopoly protection rights. The resulting invalidations of the patents paved the way for Canadian drug producers to produce less expensive, generic versions of the drugs. Eli Lilly's notice argued that Canada's entire legal basis for determining a patent's validity -- that a pharmaceutical corporation should be required to verify its promises of a drug's utility in order to obtain a patent -- is "arbitrary, unfair, unjust, and discriminatory." The company alleged that Canada's legal standard violated the NAFTA guarantee of a "minimum standard of treatment" for foreign investors and resulted in a NAFTA-prohibited expropriation. Pending, asking $481 Million
Lone Pine Resources, a U.S.-based corporation, challenged Quebec's moratorium on the controversial practice of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, for natural gas. The provincial government declared the moratorium in 2011 so as to conduct an environmental impact assessment of the extraction method widely accused of leaching chemicals and gases into groundwater and the air. Lone Pine Resources, a Delaware-headquartered gas and oil exploration and production company, had plans and permits to engage in fracking on over 30,000 acres of land directly beneath the St. Lawrence River. Lone Pine argued that the fracking moratorium nullified those permits. According to Lone Pine, such policymaking contravened NAFTA's protections against expropriation and for "fair and equitable treatment." Pending, asking $241 Million
U.S. investors who own a logging company in Canada notified Canada that they intend to launch a NAFTA case against the government for not extending to their company an Ontario tax break reserved for Canadian firms that practice sustainable harvesting. The U.S. investors argued that their exclusion from the tax break is not because they are logging unsustainably, but because their company does not meet the criteria under Ontario's law that more than half of the shareholders must be Canadian to qualify for the tax break. The investors allege that this condition violates the national treatment and "minimum standard of treatment" protections that NAFTA provides their company. Pending, asking $12 Million
U.S. oil corporation Mobil (of ExxonMobil) is launching another NAFTA challenge against the Canada-Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Board's Guidelines for Research and Development Expenditures, which require oil extraction firms to support R&D in Canada's poorest provinces. An earlier NAFTA case that Mobil and Murphy Oil launched against the same policy resulted in a $13 million ruling against Canada (see above). The tribunal in that case decided the corporations could continue bringing cases against Canada for the continued requirement to support R&D. Mobil is now taking advantage of that allowance.
KBR, a large U.S. defense and energy contractor, challenged Mexican court rulings that annulled another investor-state tribunal's ruling in a contractual dispute between KBR and Pemex, Mexico's state-owned oil company. The underlying dispute resulted in a ruling from an International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) tribunal that ordered Pemex to pay more than $300 million to KBR. KBR filed suit in U.S. courts to enforce the ICC ruling, while Pemex challenged it in Mexican courts. After Mexican courts annulled the ICC ruling, KBR launched a NAFTA case arguing that the annulment violated Mexico's national treatment, most favored nation, minimum standard of treatment and expropriation obligations. While pursuing the NAFTA claim, KBR is simultaneously pursuing full enforcement of the ICC ruling in U.S. courts, and has reportedly initiated a third case in Luxembourg. Pending, asking $110 Million
A group of U.S. investors allege that Mexican officials have interfered with their business by forcing the closure of Mexican casinos in which they have investments, following an act of arson in one of the casinos. The investors acknowledge that their own business partner in Mexico is pursuing a case in Mexican courts to invalidate their permit to operate. They suggest that they may seek to also challenge the outcome of that case in their NAFTA claim. The investors claim violation of NAFTA's national treatment, minimum standard of treatment, most-favored-nation treatment, and expropriation obligations. Pending, asking $100 Million
A group of U.S. investors claimed that the Costa Rican government has not sufficiently or promptly paid them for beachfront property that the government plans to convert into a nature reserve. Just before CAFTA took effect, Costa Rica's Supreme Court ordered government authorities to begin the process of purchasing the investors' beachfront property to convert it into a national park. The investors argue that subsequent delays and inadequate payment for the land violate Costa Rica's CAFTA obligations concerning national treatment, most favored nation treatment, expropriation and a minimum standard of treatment. Pending, asking $49 Million
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
7
4
3
