London Arbitration Week 2025

THE AUTHOR:
Pritam Dumbré, LL.M. Graduate from the School of International Arbitration, Queen Mary University of London

Overview

London Arbitration Week opened with an impressively layered dialogue titled “The Next Generation of Arbitration in the Era of Energy Transition: Risks, Regions, and Remedies.” The event was a multi-jurisdictional assessment of prevalent and possible disputes within the Renewable Energy industry, with a special focus on the global transition toward net zero and decarbonization.

Hosted by London Very Young Arbitration Practitioners (VYAP) in collaboration with International Bar Association (IBA Arb40) and Young Energy Arbitration Club, the session convened at Norton Rose Fullbright’s London Office. The panel was moderated by Simona Valkova (Valkova Arbitration & IBA Arb40) and featured:

Tochukwu J. Anaenugwu, MCIArb. (ALN Nigeria | Aluko & Oyebode)
Nahi El Hachem (Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP)
Lilit Nagapetyan (Norton Rose Fulbright and London VYAP Executive Committee)
Max Latchmore (Octopus Energy) offered insights from Africa, the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and the UK respectively.

Together, the panellists offered perspectives on the energy transition from Africa, the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and the United Kingdom.

Understanding the Forces Shaping Renewable-Energy Transition Worldwide

The first part of this session unfolded with panellists taking an overview of the energy-transition landscape across the represented jurisdictions.

Africa

Anaenugwu highlighted the asymmetry that characterises Africa’s transition to renewables: while many African states are actively pursuing carbon-efficient projects, a parallel reliance on conventional energy sources persists. This tension reflects the challenge of meeting net-zero commitments amid competing realities, the economic pull of abundant oil and gas reserves, and the high cost of financing large-scale renewable projects. Yet, when viewed against their nationally determined contributions and the recent rise of major solar and wind developments, the broader picture suggests that Africa remains firmly committed to strengthening the global response to climate change.

Middle East

In contrast, the discussion turned to the Middle East, where El-Hachem identified comparative wealth as a defining factor in the region’s transition. Additionally, the Gulf States’ ambitions to reduce dependence on oil and gas revenues, and to shift their energy mix toward renewables, are supported by modernised laws and increasingly liberalised policies. Countries, including Qatar and Saudi Arabia, are making rapid progress towards net-zero through a series of large-scale projects, such as Egypt’s largest photovoltaic solar power plant completed in 2021. Much of this momentum stems from the alignment between political will and financial capacity, a combination that has allowed the region to advance decisively in its energy-transition efforts.

Testing the Tribunal: Procedural Non-Compliance in Practice

Beyond language and tone, the panel turned to procedural non-compliance as a recurring form of misconduct. This may take the form of active disregard for tribunal directions or more passive resistance, such as persistent delays or objections to minor procedural adjustments. Even refusing to accommodate inconsequential changes to the schedule may signal reluctance or hostility toward the process. While such conduct may seem trivial in isolation, cumulatively it can erode the tribunal’s authority and disrupt the efficiency and flow of proceedings.

The discussion further highlighted that procedural non-compliance is rarely accidental. When parties consistently test the limits of tribunal patience, they risk shifting the focus away from the merits of the dispute and toward procedural skirmishes that consume time and resources. Whether manifested through aggressive rhetoric or systematic non-compliance, these early-stage forms of misconduct share a common characteristic: they signal a willingness to prioritise tactical advantage over procedural integrity.

United Kingdom

The discussion then moved to the UK’s own regulatory landscape and the complexities surrounding its reconfiguration to renewable energy. Drawing on his experience in the sector, Latchmore noted that while northern regions such as Scotland enjoy substantial access to clean power, policy challenges remain in other regions. While net-zero objectives feature prominently in most policy debates, several key dilemmas persist: whether proximity to renewable sources should translate into lower consumer costs, how to address the resulting regional disparities and whether harmonising those costs is even feasible.

Investment decisions introduce a further layer of complexity, given how a substantial proportion of renewable projects are financed by third-party funders. Furthermore, oil and gas still form part of the national energy mix. As a result of all these factors, despite measurable progress, the UK finds itself at a delicate equilibrium, aware of the direction it must move in, yet navigating several competing pressures along the way.

Eastern Europe

The focus then shifted to Eastern Europe, a region which, as Lilit Nagapetyan noted, cannot be meaningfully assessed without reference to its socio-political and historical context. Here, the energy-transition trilemma of security, affordability and alignment with decarbonisation goals assumes a distinct character. Long-standing historical dependence on coal continues to shape infrastructure, regulatory choices and political priorities. Whether in politically fractured democracies such as Hungary or coal-driven economies like Poland, environmental considerations have rarely occupied centre stage given the dominance of industrial expansion in shaping the energy agenda, its imprint unmistakably clear.

This transition is further hindered by regulatory responses shaped by economic hardships carried on from the post-communist period. With States retaining substantial control over natural resources, resistance to EU-mandated decarbonisation is not unusual. For that matter, Poland’s decision to increase fossil-fuel consumption in 2014 in protest of the EU’s 2015 targets illustrates this tension. Accordingly, the region’s journey toward renewables is marked by several competing pressures: historical reliance on fossil fuel, governance priorities and the need to navigate economic and political sensitivities while pursuing contemporary climate objectives.

As the first part of the session closed, Valkova turned the discussion towards post-pandemic policy shifts and the EU’s withdrawal from the Energy Charter Treaty 1994 (“ECT“). The panel observed that Eastern Europe continues to pursue decarbonisation, but often for reasons tied to energy security and sovereignty rather than purely environmental aims. The coal sector remains a significant source of employment, and any transition risks significant socio-economic disruption, unless credible replacements and incentives are in place. On the ECT question, while the EU has exited, several Eastern European States remain parties to the treaty, meaning that the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (“ISDS“) mechanism continues to apply to non-EU investments.

Mapping the Emerging Fault Lines in Energy Transition

The second theme of the event examined the types of disputes likely to surface in the renewable-energy sector. In Africa, Anaenugwu noted that States face differing priorities: while some are well placed to scale up renewable energy, others may continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels. Broadly, disputes fall into two streams: investor-State disputes under ISDS mechanisms and private-party disputes within the international commercial arbitration sphere. In his view, licensing revocations, expropriation claims, aggressive resource nationalism and failures by State entities to honour contractual commitments following political change are likely to constitute the bulk of ISDS-related claims. Among private actors, disputes are more likely to concern design and technology issues, as well as procurement and gas-supply arrangements, particularly where pipeline infrastructure is involved.

In the Middle Eastern context, El-Hachem highlighted how several disputes tend to arise from the inherent unpredictability of natural energy sources and the uneven pace at which they can be harnessed. Delays in grid connection, particularly questions concerning responsibility for linking wind and solar projects to the national electricity network, frequently become points of contention. Guarantor disputes are also foreseeable, given the nuance of foreign investors typically requiring sovereign guarantees to protect their investments against shifts in political conditions.

Returning to Eastern Europe, Nagapetyan cited institutional statistics that show most renewable-energy disputes in the region stem from force majeure claims. Delays frequently exacerbate matters, largely because infrastructure has not kept pace with ongoing developments. Finally, shifting policy frameworks, especially the move toward public-private partnership models from a state dominated one, have generated a fresh wave of claims as States and investors adjust to new arrangements.

To further understand how the transition to net zero plays out in the corporate sphere, the moderator turned to Latchmore, who pointed out the growing significance of battery storage in renewable-energy markets. Batteries serve as the critical link between the variability of production and the steadiness consumers expect. This gives rise to what the sector informally refers to as “energy arbitrage”, storing electricity when generation is high and supplying it when demand arises. While not yet a well-known category of legal disputes, it raises important commercial questions about who ultimately bears the financial and operational risks, particularly where multiple entities are involved across generation, storage, and distribution.

Counting What Matters: Quantum, Assessment and the Next Decade of Renewable-Energy Disputes

In considering how disputes in the renewable-energy sector might be mitigated, the discussion moved to its final agenda: quantum and assessment, and how better valuation practices may help avoid disputes altogether. Offering a chartered accountant’s perspective, Nagapetyan cautioned that linear forecasting models and generic interest assumptions often fail to withstand the volatility inherent in renewable-energy projects. Care must therefore be taken to avoid double counting in cash flow analyses. Where disputes do arise, tribunals tend to place significant weight on raw operational data and precise reporting, given the technical nature of these claims. Achieving this level of accuracy, however, is challenging, especially when figures shift after multiple adjustments across complex processes.

Valkova closed the session by inviting each panellist to share their prediction for the renewable-energy arbitration landscape in 2030. The responses reflected the diversity of perspectives on the panels: offshore wind for Nagapetyan, delay-driven disputes for El-Hachem, technology-related issues for Latchmore, and in Anaenugwu’s view, a clear rise in mining-related claims.

The discussion ultimately offered a forecast of the renewable-energy landscape, one defined by uneven transitions, rising pressures, and evolving remedies. Whatever form the next decade takes, energy arbitration will certainly remain a key forum where these ambitions and frictions meet.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Pritam Dumbré is an international arbitration and commercial disputes professional, legally trained and based in London. He is licensed to practise in India and has been an Advocate since 2022, with experience in civil and commercial litigation. He holds an LL.M. in Comparative and International Dispute Resolution from the School of International Arbitration, Queen Mary University of London, and a Master’s degree in Political Science. He closely follows geopolitical developments and focuses on investor–State disputes, arbitration in the film and creative industries, and art disputes. He has contributed to arbitration commentary and is actively engaged with the international disputes community.

*The views and opinions expressed by authors are theirs and do not necessarily reflect those of their organizations, employers, or Daily Jus, Jus Mundi, or Jus Connect.