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

Riversdale and Hancock v. Canada, Request for Arbitration, December 16, 2024

16 Dec 2024
Riversdale Resources Pty Ltd and Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd v. Canada, ICSID Case No. ARB/24/50
View case details
Request for Arbitration
Document Details:
LISTED PARTICIPANTS
Request for Arbitration
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
James M. Hosking
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
Vasilis F.L. Pappas, Sabrina A. Bandali
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
Entities
Bennett Jones, Riversdale Resources Pty Ltd., Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd., Canada
Country
Print reporter
Document Summary
Request for Arbitration
This summary note is machine-generated. Always consult the original materials.

Procedural Posture and Purpose of the Document

This document constitutes the Claimants' Request for Arbitration submitted to the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) pursuant to Article 36 of the ICSID Convention and Article 9.19 of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). The Claimants, Riversdale Resources Pty Ltd and Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd, formally commence arbitral proceedings against the Government of Canada, seeking redress for alleged violations of the CPTPP's investment protection standards arising from the regulatory treatment of the Grassy Mountain metallurgical coal project in Alberta, Canada.

Factual Background and Principal Legal Issues

The dispute centers on the Claimants' investments in metallurgical coal mining assets in the Crowsnest Pass and Eastern Slopes regions of Alberta. The Claimants allege that the provincial and federal governments of Canada unlawfully frustrated the development of the Grassy Mountain Project. Specifically, the Claimants challenge the June 2021 decision by a Joint Review Panel (acting in its capacity as the Alberta Energy Regulator) to deny provincial environmental approval for the project, citing significant adverse environmental effects. Furthermore, the Claimants challenge the Alberta government's March 2022 imposition of an indefinite moratorium on coal exploration and development on Category 4 lands, which effectively sterilized the Claimants' freehold mineral rights and Crown leases.

The principal legal issues raised in the Request concern whether Canada's regulatory measures and the subsequent judicial refusals to grant leave to appeal constitute breaches of Section A of Chapter 9 of the CPTPP. The Claimants assert violations of the minimum standard of treatment (Article 9.6), arguing that the regulatory denials and the moratorium were arbitrary, lacked due process, and frustrated their legitimate expectations. Additionally, the Claimants allege unlawful expropriation (Article 9.8), contending that the measures permanently deprived them of the economic benefit of their investments without prompt, adequate, and effective compensation. The Claimants further plead breaches of the national treatment (Article 9.4) and most-favoured-nation treatment (Article 9.5) standards, asserting that domestic and third-state investors in like circumstances were permitted to proceed with comparable mining projects.

Relief Sought and Procedural Directions

In their prayer for relief, the Claimants request a declaration that Canada breached its obligations under the CPTPP and seek full reparation for the destruction of their investment's value. The Claimants estimate their damages to exceed CAD 2 billion, encompassing sunk costs, lost future profits, and related expenditures. Furthermore, the Claimants request pre- and post-award compound interest, as well as the full costs of the arbitration and legal representation. Procedurally, the Claimants propose a three-member arbitral tribunal seated in English and formally appoint James Hosking as their party-appointed arbitrator.