- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- Charanne B.V. and Construction Investments S.A.R.L. v. Spain
Charanne B.V. and Construction Investments S.A.R.L. v. Spain
Geography
International
Year
2012
Document Type
Litigation
About this case
Filing year
2012
Status
Decided in favor of State (21 Jan 2016)
Geography
International
Court/admin entity
Arbitral Tribunal → Stockholm Chamber of Commerce
Case category
Suits against governments (Global) → Trade and Investment (Global) → Rollback of climate-justified measures (Global)
Principal law
International Law → Energy Charter Treaty
At issue
Whether the rollback of subsidies by the Spanish government to the renewable energy sector violates the investor's legitimate expectations and the fair and equitable treatment standard under Article 10(1) of the ECT.
Topics
, ,
Documents
Filing Date
Document
Type
Topics
Beta
Search results
Summary
The case "Charanne B.V. and Construction Investments S.A.R.L. v. Spain" (SCC Case No. 062/2012) involves a dispute under the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) between the claimants, Charanne B.V. and Construction Investments S.A.R.L., and the respondent, the Kingdom of Spain. The claimants invested in the Spanish renewable energy sector, specifically in photovoltaic plants, based on Spain's regulatory framework that included a ""Feed-In Tariff"" (FIT) regime established by RD 661/07 and RD 1578/08. This regime was intended to incentivize investments by guaranteeing certain tariffs for a minimum of 25 years.
The dispute arose when Spain implemented regulatory changes in 2010, which included RD 1565/2010 and RDL 14/2010, altering the FIT regime. The claimants argued that these changes violated their legitimate expectations and the fair and equitable treatment standard under Article 10(1) of the ECT, as they had relied on the stability of the original regulatory framework when making their investments.
The tribunal, seated in Madrid and operating under the SCC Arbitration Rules (2010), found in favor of Spain. It concluded that there was no indirect expropriation of the claimants' investments and that the changes did not violate the ECT's fair and equitable treatment standard. The tribunal determined that Spain retained its regulatory power to amend the regime, and the claimants' expectations were not deemed legitimate in the context of the regulatory changes.
Topics mentioned most in this case Beta
See how often topics get mentioned in this case and view specific passages of text highlighted in each document. Accuracy is not 100%. Learn more
Group
Topics
Target
Policy instrument
Impacted group
Renewable energy
Fossil fuel
Greenhouse gas
Economic sector
Adaptation/resilience
Finance