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

Sundance and Congo Iron v. Congo, Claimant's Press Release, January 27, 2026

27 Jan 2026
Sundance Resources Limited and Congo Iron SA v. Republic of Congo, ICC Case No. 26145/DDA/AZO (C-26344/AZO)
Claimant's Press Release
Document Details:
LISTED PARTICIPANTS
Claimant's Press Release
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
Judges
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
Country
Print reporter
Document Summary
Claimant's Press Release
This summary note is machine-generated. Always consult the original materials.

Procedural Posture and Background

This document is a public market update issued by Sundance Resources Ltd, announcing the final disposition of its International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) arbitration against the Republic of Congo. The dispute centered on the sovereign revocation of an exploitation permit held by the claimant’s subsidiary, Congo Iron. The claimant additionally provides a brief status update regarding a separate, pending ICC arbitration against the Republic of Cameroon.

Tribunal's Findings and Disposition

The ICC tribunal dismissed all claims brought by Sundance and Congo Iron. In its merits determination, the tribunal concluded that the Republic of Congo possessed a legitimate legal basis for revoking the exploitation permit, specifically citing the claimant's failure to develop the underlying mining project during the 2016–2018 period.

Subsequent Set-Aside Proceedings

In response to the adverse award, the claimant, supported by its litigation funder, has initiated set-aside proceedings before the High Court of Justice, Commercial Court in London. The claimant asserts that the award is vitiated by serious irregularities pursuant to Section 68 of the English Arbitration Act 1996. Specifically, the claimant alleges that the tribunal committed fundamental errors regarding the mechanics of the iron ore market and improperly grounded its conclusions on issues extraneous to the parties' formal submissions, thereby denying the claimant a fair opportunity to present its case.