Notice: We are currently performing maintenance to improve the italaw platform. The site remains fully accessible. Thank you for your patience.

italaw180943 - Global Voice Group v. ARPT and Guinea, Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, May 29, 2026

29 May 2026
Global Voice Group SA v. The Postal and Telecommunications Regulatory Authority of Guinea, and the Republic of Guinea, ICC Case No. 22467/DDA , ICC Case No. 22467/DDA
Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Document Details:
LISTED PARTICIPANTS
Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Participants listed are for this document only and may not include all participants involved in the entire case. Always consult the original documents.
Claimant appointee
Respondent appointee
Tribunal/Panel chair
Arbitrator(s)
Sole Arbitrator
ICSID Annulment Committee president
ICSID Annulment Committee members
WTO Appellate Body members
WTO Appellate Body chair
Claimant's counsel
Claimant's law firm
Respondent's counsel
Respondent's law firm
Other counsel
Claimant's expert
Claimant's expert firm
Respondent's expert
Respondent's expert firm
Claimant's witness
Respondent's witness
Other witnesses
Tribunal secretary
Tribunal assistant
Third-party funder
Print reporter
Document Summary
Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
This summary note is machine-generated. Always consult the original materials.

This Judgment, issued per curiam by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, addresses an appeal by Global Voice Group SA concerning claims against the Republic of Guinea. The appeal originated from a decision of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The Court of Appeals ordered and adjudged a partial reversal of the lower court's decision. Specifically, the appellate court vacated the District Court's dismissal of Global Voice's claim for the confirmation of an arbitral award. However, it affirmed the dismissal of a related claim for the recognition of a judgment. The matter was remanded to the District Court for further proceedings consistent with the Court of Appeals' accompanying opinion.