{"id":130340,"date":"2026-03-09T13:22:47","date_gmt":"2026-03-09T13:22:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/?post_type=comparative_guide&#038;p=130340"},"modified":"2026-03-16T11:44:40","modified_gmt":"2026-03-16T11:44:40","slug":"uzbekistan-investment-treaty-arbitration","status":"publish","type":"comparative_guide","link":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/chapter\/uzbekistan-investment-treaty-arbitration\/","title":{"rendered":"Uzbekistan: Investment Treaty Arbitration"},"content":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"template":"","class_list":["post-130340","comparative_guide","type-comparative_guide","status-publish","hentry","guides-investment-treaty-arbitration","jurisdictions-uzbekistan"],"acf":[],"appp":{"post_list":{"below_title":"<div class=\"guide-author-details\"><span class=\"guide-author\">DG Partners<\/span><span class=\"guide-author-logo\"><img src=\"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/1\/2026\/02\/DGP_ENG-classic.jpg\"\/><\/span><\/div>"},"post_detail":{"above_title":"<div class=\"guide-author-details\"><span class=\"guide-author\">DG Partners<\/span><span class=\"guide-author-logo\"><img src=\"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/1\/2026\/02\/DGP_ENG-classic.jpg\"\/><\/span><\/div>","below_title":"<span class=\"guide-intro\">This country specific Q&amp;A provides an overview of Investment Treaty Arbitration laws and regulations applicable in Uzbekistan<\/span><div class=\"guide-content\"><div class=\"filter\">\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t<input type=\"text\" placeholder=\"Search questions and answers...\" class=\"filter-container__search-field\">\r\n\t\t\t<\/div>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t<ol class=\"custom-counter\">\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Has your home state signed and \/ or ratified the ICSID Convention? If so, has the state made any notifications and \/ or designations on signing or ratifying the treaty?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Yes, Uzbekistan signed the ICSID Convention on 17 March 1994 and deposited the instrument of ratification on 26 July 1995. The ICSID Convention entered into force for Uzbekistan on 25 August 1995.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">1<\/sup><\/p>\n<p>Uzbekistan has not yet made any publicly recorded notifications or designations in connection with its signature of the ICSID Convention.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">2<\/sup><\/p>\n<p><u>Footnote(s):<\/u><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">1<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">ICSID Database: \u201cList of Contracting States and Other Signatories of the Convention\u201d, available at: https:\/\/icsid.worldbank.org\/sites\/default\/files\/ICSID-3.pdf.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">2<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">ICSID Database: \u201cUzbekistan. Designations and Notifications\u201d, available at: https:\/\/icsid.worldbank.org\/about\/member-states\/database-of-member-states\/member-state-details?state=ST152; ICSID, \u201cContracting States and Measures Taken by Them for the Purpose of the Convention (ICSID\/8)\u201d (28 October 2022), available at: https:\/\/icsid.worldbank.org\/sites\/default\/files\/documents\/2022_Oct%2028_ICSID.ENG.pdf.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Has your home state signed and \/ or ratified the New York Convention? If so, has it made any declarations and \/ or reservations on signing or ratifying the treaty?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Uzbekistan acceded to the New York Convention on 7 February 1996, which entered into force for Uzbekistan on 7 May 1996. Upon accession, Uzbekistan did not make any declarations or reservations.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">3<\/sup><\/p>\n<p><u>Footnote(s):<\/u><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">3<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">Contracting States. Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1958 \u2013 \u201cThe New York Convention\u201d, available at: https:\/\/www.newyorkconvention.org\/contracting-states.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Does your home state have a Model BIT? If yes, does the Model BIT adopt or omit any language which restricts or broadens the investor's rights?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>No, Uzbekistan has not yet officially published a model BIT.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Please list all treaties facilitating investments (e.g. BITs, FTAs, MITs) currently in force that your home state has signed and \/ or ratified. To what extent do such treaties adopt or omit any of the language in your state's Model BIT or otherwise restrict or broaden the investor's rights? In particular: a) Has your state exercised termination rights or indicated any intention to do so? If so, on what basis (e.g. impact of the Achmea decisions, political opposition to the Energy Charter Treaty, or other changes in policy)? b) Do any of the treaties reflect (i) changes in environmental and energy policies, (ii) the advent of emergent technology, (iii) the regulation of investment procured by corruption, and (iv) transparency of investor state proceedings (whether due to the operation of the Mauritius Convention or otherwise). c) Does your jurisdiction publish any official guidelines, notes verbales or diplomatic notes concerning the interpretation of treaty provisions and other issues arising under the treaties?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>At present, Uzbekistan is a party to 50 bilateral investment treaties (BITs) in force:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>India \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2024);<\/li>\n<li>Belarus \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2019);<\/li>\n<li>\u00a0Republic of Korea \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2019);<\/li>\n<li>Tajikistan \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2018);<\/li>\n<li>Turkey \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2017);<\/li>\n<li>Russian Federation \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2013);<\/li>\n<li>Saudi Arabia \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2011);<\/li>\n<li>China \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2011);<\/li>\n<li>Bahrain \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2009);<\/li>\n<li>Oman \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2009);<\/li>\n<li>Japan \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2008);<\/li>\n<li>United Arab Emirates \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2007);<\/li>\n<li>\u00a0Kuwait \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2004);<\/li>\n<li>Slovenia \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2003);<\/li>\n<li>Singapore \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2003);<\/li>\n<li>Spain \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2003);<\/li>\n<li>Hungary \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2002);<\/li>\n<li>Lithuania \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2002);<\/li>\n<li>Portugal \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2001);<\/li>\n<li>Sweden \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2001);<\/li>\n<li>Bangladesh \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2000);<\/li>\n<li>\u00a0Islamic Republic of Iran \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2000);<\/li>\n<li>Austria \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2000);<\/li>\n<li>Bulgaria \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1998);<\/li>\n<li>Belgium \u2013 Luxembourg Economic Union \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1998);<\/li>\n<li>Malaysia \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1997);<\/li>\n<li>Kazakhstan \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1997);<\/li>\n<li>Greece \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1997);<\/li>\n<li>Czech Republic \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1997);<\/li>\n<li>Kyrgyzstan \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1996);<\/li>\n<li>Indonesia \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1996);<\/li>\n<li>Romania \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1996);<\/li>\n<li>Azerbaijan \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1996);<\/li>\n<li>Latvia \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1996);<\/li>\n<li>Viet Nam \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1996);<\/li>\n<li>Netherlands \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1996);<\/li>\n<li>Turkmenistan \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1996);<\/li>\n<li>Republic of Moldova \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1995);<\/li>\n<li>Georgia \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1995);<\/li>\n<li>Slovakia \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1995);<\/li>\n<li>Poland \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1995);<\/li>\n<li>Israel \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1994);<\/li>\n<li>United Kingdom \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1993);<\/li>\n<li>France \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1993);<\/li>\n<li>Germany \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1993);<\/li>\n<li>Switzerland \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1993);<\/li>\n<li>Ukraine \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1993);<\/li>\n<li>\u00a0Egypt \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1992);<\/li>\n<li>Finland \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1992);<\/li>\n<li>Pakistan \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1992).<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">4<\/sup>&nbsp;\n<p>In addition, Uzbekistan has signed the following BITs:<\/li>\n<li>Jordan \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2025) (not yet ratified);<\/li>\n<li>Italy \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2025) (Uzbekistan has implemented all of the domestic procedures necessary for the entry into force of the said international BIT);<\/li>\n<li>United States \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1994) (not ratified).<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">5<\/sup><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Beyond BITs, Uzbekistan is also a party to a number of treaties containing investment provisions, including:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>Agreement on Free Trade in Services, Establishment, Operation, and Investment (2023) between CIS member-states;<\/li>\n<li>Framework Agreement between the Government of the United States of America, the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic, the Government of the Republic of Tajikistan, the Government of Turkmenistan, and the Government of the Republic of Uzbekistan Concerning the Development of Trade and Investment Relations (2004);<\/li>\n<li>Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (1996);<\/li>\n<li>The Energy Charter Treaty, Trade Amendment and Related Documents (1994).<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Uzbekistan has also signed, but not yet ratified, the Agreement on Promotion and Protection of Investments among ECO Member States (2005).<\/p>\n<p><strong>In particular: To what extent do such treaties adopt or omit any of the language in your state&#8217;s Model BIT or otherwise restrict or broaden the investor&#8217;s rights? In particular:<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>a. Has your state exercised termination rights or indicated any intention to do so? If so, on what basis (e.g. impact of the Achmea decisions, political opposition to the Energy Charter Treaty, or other changes in policy)?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The following BITs were terminated:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>China \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1992) was replaced by China \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2011);<\/li>\n<li>Russian Federation \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1997) was replaced by Russian Federation &#8211; Uzbekistan BIT (2013);<\/li>\n<li>Turkey \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1992) was replaced by Turkey \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2017);<\/li>\n<li>Republic of Korea \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1992) was replaced by Republic of Korea \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2019);<\/li>\n<li>India \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1999) was unilaterally denounced by India and terminated on 22 March 2017;<\/li>\n<li>Italy \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1997) was denounced.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">6<\/sup><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><strong>b. Do any of the treaties reflect (i) changes in environmental and energy policies, (ii) the advent of emergent technology, (iii) the regulation of investment procured by corruption, and (iv) transparency of investor state proceedings (whether due to the operation of the Mauritius Convention or otherwise).<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>(i) The India \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2024) contains the \u2018<em>right of the state to regulate<\/em>\u2019 provisions allowing signing parties to \u201c<em>take regulatory or other measures to ensure that development in its territory is consistent with the goals and principles of sustainable development, and other legitimate social, economic, environmental or any other public policy objectives<\/em>\u201d.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">7<\/sup>\u00a0(Article 3). Further, the BIT excludes certain \u2018<em>public purpose<\/em>\u2019 regulatory actions, including measures addressing impact on the environment, not to be regarded as expropriatory measures. (Article 6). The BIT also encourages investors and their enterprises operating within the territory of each signatory to voluntarily integrate internationally recognised corporate social responsibility standards, i.a., in the area of environment, \u201c<em>such as statements of principle that have been endorsed or are supported by the Parties<\/em>\u201d,<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">8<\/sup> into their internal policies and business practices. (Article 13). Finally, the BIT contains a \u2018General Exceptions\u2019 Article that preserves the State\u2019s regulatory space by acknowledging its authority to adopt and implement non-discriminatory measures aimed, among other things, at protecting and conserving the environment. (Article 34).<\/p>\n<p>A number of BITs contain general exceptions allowing signatory states to adopt, maintain, or enforce non-discriminatory measures related to the:<\/p>\n<p>1) (i) protection of human, animal or plant life or health; (ii) protection and conservation of the environment, including all living and non-living natural resources;<sup>9<\/sup><\/p>\n<p>2) (i) protection of human, animal or plant life or health, or the environment; (ii) conservation of living or non-living exhaustible natural resources;<sup>10<\/sup><\/p>\n<p>3)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 protection of human, animal or plant life or health, or the environment.<sup>11<\/sup><\/p>\n<p>Additionally, the Turkey \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2017) provides that \u201c[n]<em>on-discriminatory legal measures designed and applied to protect legitimate public welfare objectives, such as health, safety and environment, do not constitute indirect expropriation<\/em>\u201d.<sup>12<\/sup><\/p>\n<p>(ii)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 None of the signed BITs address emergent technologies.<\/p>\n<p>(iii)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Provisions regulating investments procured by corruption can only be found in the India \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2024). According to Article 12(V) thereof investors are prohibited from investing by fraudulent misrepresentation, concealment, corruption, money laundering, abuse of process or similar illegal mechanisms.<\/p>\n<p>(iv)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Uzbekistan is not a signatory to the Mauritius Convention on Transparency in Treaty-based Investor-State Arbitration (2014).<\/p>\n<p>The India \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2024) reflects principles incorporating wide transparency standards into their dispute resolution mechanisms in Article 24.<\/p>\n<p>The Republic of Korea \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2019) expressly provides in footnote 5 that the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law Rules on Transparency in Treaty-based Investor-State Arbitration (UN Doc A\/CN.9\/783) shall not apply to arbitrations initiated under Article 11(2)(c) of the BIT (initiated under the Arbitration Rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law) unless the contracting Parties otherwise agree. The BIT contains the requirement that the contracting Parties \u2018enter into consultations\u2019 on the future application of the said rules to arbitrations initiated pursuant to Article 11(2)(c) of the BIT upon request of a Party.<\/p>\n<p><u>Footnote(s):<\/u><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">4<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">UNCTAD. International Investment Agreements Navigator. Uzbekistan, available at: https:\/\/investmentpolicy.unctad.org\/international-investment-agreements\/countries\/226\/uzbekistan.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">5<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">Ibid.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">6<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">UNCTAD. International Investment Agreements Navigator. Uzbekistan. Italy &#8211; Uzbekistan BIT (1997), available at: https:\/\/investmentpolicy.unctad.org\/international-investment-agreements\/treaties\/bilateral-investment-treaties\/2134\/italy&#8212;uzbekistan-bit-1997-<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">7<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">India \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2024), Article 3, paragraph 3.1.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">8<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">India \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2024), Article 1.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">9<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">Belarus \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2019), Article 7, paragraphs 34.1(ii)-(iv).<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">10<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">Republic of Korea \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2019), Article 17, paragraph 1(d).<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">11<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">Turkey \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2017), Article 5, paragraph 1(a).<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">12<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">Turkey \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2017), Article 6, paragraph 2.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Does your home state have any legislation \/ instrument facilitating direct foreign investment. If so: a) Please list out any formal criteria imposed by such legislation \/ instrument (if any) concerning the admission and divestment of foreign investment; b) Please list out what substantive right(s) and protection(s) foreign investors enjoy under such legislation \/ instrument; c) Please list out what recourse (if any) a foreign investor has against the home state in respect of its rights under such legislation \/ instrument; and d) Does this legislation regulate the use of third-party funding and other non-conventional means of financing.<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Yes, in 2019 Uzbekistan had passed Law \u201cOn Investments and Investment Activities\u201d No. ZRU-598 of 25 December 2019 (\u201cLOI\u201d).<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">13<\/sup> It is the main legislation for regulating foreign investments in Uzbekistan. Based on the publicly available information, a revised LOI is being developed with the World Bank and IFC\u2019s support. The updated law is aimed to align Uzbekistan\u2019s investment framework with international standards, strengthen investor protections, and expand equal treatment and incentives for foreign investors.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">14<\/sup><\/p>\n<p>If so:<\/p>\n<p><strong>a. Please list out any formal criteria imposed by such legislation \/ instrument (if any) concerning the admission and divestment of foreign investment;<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The LOI does not contain any formal criteria concerning the admission and divestment of foreign investment.<\/p>\n<p><strong>b. Please list out what substantive right(s) and protection(s) foreign investors enjoy under such legislation \/ instrument;<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The following rights are granted to investors in Uzbekistan under the LOI:<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">15<\/sup><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>freely carry out investment activities, decide the volumes, types, forms, scope and directions of investment that do not contradict the legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan;<\/li>\n<li>enter into contracts with legal entities and individuals for investment activities;<\/li>\n<li>own, use and dispose of its investments and results of investment activities, as well as sell and export the results of investment activities;<\/li>\n<li>independently and freely dispose of income received as a result of investment activities, after payment of taxes, fees and other payments provided for by law;<\/li>\n<li>use the property and any property rights owned by it as security for all types of obligations undertaken by it, including obligations aimed at attracting borrowed funds;<\/li>\n<li>receive reasonable compensation in case of requisition (expropriation) of its investments and other assets;<\/li>\n<li>raise funds in the form of loans and borrowings;<\/li>\n<li>receive compensation for losses caused as a result of illegal actions (inaction) and decisions of governmental bodies, local authorities and their officials.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Further, the following substantive protections are guaranteed to foreign investors in Uzbekistan under the LOI:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Non-interference from state bodies and officials and non-discrimination (Article 15).<\/li>\n<li>Use of proceeds (Article 16): income from investment activity may be reinvested or used otherwise at the investor\u2019s discretion after taxes and other payments.<\/li>\n<li>Free transfer and repatriation of funds (Article 17): free transfer in foreign currency into\/out of Uzbekistan (subject to taxes and other payments) with limited \u2018pause\u2019 grounds provided under the law.<\/li>\n<li>Free repatriation on termination of investment activity (Article 18): foreign investor may terminate investment activity. After termination, it has the right to repatriate assets without prejudice to obligations to Uzbekistan or its other creditors.<\/li>\n<li>Protection from adverse legislative changes (Article 19): Uzbek laws are generally not retroactive if harming investor or investment.<\/li>\n<li>Transparency and access to information (Article 20): state bodies must publish information about their participation and decisions in investment sphere and ensure open access to such information.<\/li>\n<li>Protection against nationalization, requisition and expropriation (Article 21): State guarantees protection in line with domestic law and international treaties of Uzbekistan. Investments and other assets are not subject to nationalization, while requisition\/expropriation is available only in exceptional circumstances (e.g., disasters\/accidents\/epidemics etc.) and subject to compensation safeguards.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>c. Please list out what recourse (if any) a foreign investor has against the home state in respect of its rights under such legislation \/ instrument; and<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Under Article 63 of the LOI, a foreign investor\u2019s recourse against Uzbekistan is generally broken down to the following stages.<\/p>\n<p><u>First<\/u>, an investment dispute on the territory of Uzbekistan must be resolved through negotiations between the parties.<\/p>\n<p><u>Second<\/u>,\u00a0if the parties fail to reach an agreed solution through negotiations, the dispute must be submitted to mediation.<\/p>\n<p><u>Third<\/u>, where an investment dispute is not resolved through negotiations and mediation, it must be adjudicated by the competent courts of the Republic of Uzbekistan.<\/p>\n<p>Under LOI, the dispute may also be referred to international arbitration, on the condition that a valid and applicable arbitration agreement exists, as provided for in:<\/p>\n<p>i. an international treaty of the Republic of Uzbekistan, and\/or<\/p>\n<p>ii. a contract entered into between an investor and the Republic of Uzbekistan.<\/p>\n<p><strong>d. Does this legislation regulate the use of third-party funding and other non-conventional means of financing.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>No, the LOI does not contain regulation on the use of third-party funding or other non-conventional means of financing.<\/p>\n<p><u>Footnote(s):<\/u><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">13<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">Law \u201cOn Investments and Investment Activitiy\u201d No. ZRU-598 of 25 December 2019 available at: https:\/\/lex.uz\/ru\/docs\/4664144 in Uzbek and Russian.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">14<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">The new edition of the Law \u201cOn Investments and Investment Activities\u201d was approved. The Government Portal of the Republic of Uzbekistan. Available at: https:\/\/gov.uz\/en\/miit\/news\/view\/33970.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">15<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">Ibid., Articles 10, 21.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Has your home state appeared as a respondent in any investment treaty arbitrations? If so, please outline any notable practices adopted by your state in such proceedings (e.g. participation in proceedings, jurisdictional challenges, preliminary applications \/ objections, approach to awards rendered against it, etc.)<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Yes, there has been 11 reported cases where Uzbekistan appeared as a respondent in investor-state disputes.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">16<\/sup><\/p>\n<p><u>First<\/u>,\u00a0Uzbekistan challenged jurisdiction of the Tribunal in multiple cases.<\/p>\n<p>In <em>Metal-Tech Ltd. v. Republic of Uzbekistan<\/em> (ICSID Case No. ARB\/10\/3), Uzbekistan requested Metal-Tech\u2019s claims to be dismissed on two jurisdictional grounds: first, because the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction under the express terms of the BIT and, second, because Uzbek law did not provide an independent basis for jurisdiction. The Tribunal found that the dispute did not meet the consent requirement set in Article 25(1) of the ICSID Convention. Accordingly, the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction over this dispute.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">17<\/sup><\/p>\n<p>In <em>Romak S.A. v. The Republic of Uzbekistan<\/em> (PCA Case No. 2007-07\/AA280), Uzbekistan challenged the Tribunal\u2019s jurisdiction on the basis that the claimant did not own an \u2018investment\u2019 within the meaning of Article 1 of the applicable BIT. Uzbekistan argued that Romak\u2019s rights arose solely from a one-off commercial sales contract for the delivery of wheat, and that such a transaction did not constitute a protected investment. It further contended that the alleged conduct was not attributable to the State and that the domestic courts had acted reasonably. The Tribunal upheld Uzbekistan\u2019s objection, finding that the dispute arose out of a purely commercial transaction and that, in the absence of a qualifying investment, Uzbekistan had not consented to arbitration under Article 9 of the BIT, with the result that the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">18<\/sup><\/p>\n<p>In <em>Vladislav Kim and others v. Republic of Uzbekistan<\/em> (ICSID Case No. ARB\/13\/6), the latter made 4 jurisdictional objections (in relation to nationality, investments made, legality of investments and corruption). The Tribunal rejected all the jurisdictional objections.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">19<\/sup><\/p>\n<p>In <em>Oxus Gold PLC v. Republic of Uzbekistan<\/em> (UNCITRAL), Uzbekistan challenged jurisdiction of the Tribunal as well, which resulted in the Partial Award on the Issue of Jurisdiction on 9 August 2012 not available to public (\u201cPartial Award\u201d).<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">20<\/sup> In the Partial Award the Tribunal dismissed respondent\u2019s jurisdictional objection with regard to claimant\u2019s standing reserving other jurisdictional objections to a subsequent or final award.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">21<\/sup> Later Uzbekistan challenged Tribunal\u2019s jurisdiction and admissibility towards claimant\u2019s AGF claims. The Tribunal found respondent\u2019s challenge unfounded and rejected it.<\/p>\n<p><u>Second<\/u>,\u00a0Uzbekistan filed counterclaims in at least two cases.<\/p>\n<p>In <em>Metal-Tech Ltd. v. Republic of Uzbekistan<\/em> (ICSID Case No. ARB\/10\/3), the State submitted \u201c<em>that, as a result of the Claimant\u2019s unlawful actions and because the State has an ownership interest in AGMK and UzKTJM, the Respondent has suffered damages due to the Claimant\u2019s misrepresentation<\/em>\u201d.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">22<\/sup> As a consequence of it having no jurisdiction over the claims based on lack of consent, the Tribunal found no jurisdiction over the counterclaims.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">23<\/sup><\/p>\n<p>In <em>Oxus Gold PLC v. Republic of Uzbekistan<\/em> (UNCITRAL), Uzbekistan advanced counterclaims against the investor but the Arbitral Tribunal found that it lacked jurisdiction over Respondent\u2019s counter-claims.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">24<\/sup><\/p>\n<p>Third, Uzbekistan resisted set-aside proceedings at the seat and enforcement in other jurisdictions.<\/p>\n<p>In <em>Oxus Gold PLC v. Uzbekistan<\/em> (UNCITRAL), Uzbekistan successfully defended the award against annulment before the Paris Court of Appeal, which rejected the Claimant\u2019s application in full and ordered costs in Uzbekistan\u2019s favour. Oxus applied to the Paris Court of Appeal for partial set aside of the award insofar as it rejected its claims relating to the expropriation of its investment in AGF. It argued a breach of the principles of contradiction and equality of arms of Article 1520 4\u00b0 and 5\u00b0 of the French Code of Civil Procedure.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">25<\/sup><\/p>\n<p>At the enforcement stage, Uzbekistan sought to defeat attachment attempts in Switzerland against a property located in Switzerland that belong to the Republic of Uzbekistan.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">26<\/sup> Finally, the Swiss Supreme Court upheld the lower court&#8217;s decision on the annulment of the attachment order. Parallel enforcement proceedings in the United States were stayed pending annulment in France and later resumed. Ultimately, the case was settled. Therefore, proceedings were terminated with prejudice.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">27<\/sup><\/p>\n<p><u>Footnote(s):<\/u><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">16<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">ICSID Cases Database, available at: https:\/\/icsid.worldbank.org\/cases\/concluded; https:\/\/icsid.worldbank.org\/cases\/pending.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">17<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">Metal-Tech Ltd. v. Republic of Uzbekistan, ICSID Case No. ARB\/10\/3, Award, 4 October 2013.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">18<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">Romak S.A. v. The Republic of Uzbekistan, UNCITRAL, PCA Case No. AA280, Award, 26 November 2009.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">19<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">Vladislav Kim and others v. Republic of Uzbekistan, ICSID Case No. ARB\/13\/6, Decision on Jurisdiction, 8 March 2017.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">20<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">https:\/\/www.italaw.com\/cases\/781.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">21<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">Oxus Gold PLC v. Republic of Uzbekistan, the State Committee of Uzbekistan for Geology &amp; Mineral Resources, and Navoi Mining &amp; Metallurgical Kombinat, UNCITRAL, Award, 17 December 2015, at [81].<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">22<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">Metal-Tech Ltd. v. Republic of Uzbekistan, ICSID Case No. ARB\/10\/3, Award, 4 October 2013, at [393].<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">23<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">Ibid., at [413].<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">24<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">Oxus Gold PLC v. Republic of Uzbekistan, the State Committee of Uzbekistan for Geology &amp; Mineral Resources, and Navoi Mining &amp; Metallurgical Kombinat, UNCITRAL, Award, 17 December 2015, at [959].<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">25<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">See Soci\u00e9t\u00e9 Oxus Gold PLC c\/ R\u00e9publique d&#8217;Ouzbekistan, Paris, No. 16\/16502 (14 May 2019);<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">26<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">Judgment of the \u200eSwiss Supreme Court of 7 September 2018, available at: https:\/\/www.italaw.com\/cases\/781.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">27<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">See Gretton Limited v The Republic of Uzbekistan (Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-01755-JEB), Stipulation and Order of Dismissal with Prejudice, filed on 8 July 2020; Gretton Limited v The Republic of Uzbekistan (Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-01755-JEB), United States Court of Appeal, Order No. 19-7102, filed on 30 July 2020, available at https:\/\/pacer.uscourts.gov\/.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Have any significant court decisions\/arbitral awards been issued in the last year involving your country (as a party or interested party)?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>No, last year (2025) no publicly available awards were issued.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of 2024, however, an award was issued in favor of Uzbekistan in the case <em>Bursel Tekstil Sanayi Ve Di\u015f Ticaret A.\u015e. and others v. Republic of Uzbekistan<\/em>, ICSID Case No. ARB\/17\/24 (based on Turkey \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (1992)). Claims arising out of the Government\u2019s of Uzbekistan alleged failure to uphold promises made to the claimants, including the right to buy cotton at discounted prices and the exemption from value-added tax on export products, which allegedly led to the bankruptcy of the claimants\u2019 companies.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">28<\/sup><\/p>\n<p>Additionally, in 2025, Humans Mobile Ltd. (Singapore) initiated investor-state arbitration proceedings against Uzbekistan (<em>Humans Mobile Ltd. v. Republic of Uzbekistan<\/em>, ICSID Case No. ARB\/25\/24). This case is based on Singapore \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2003).<\/p>\n<p><u>Footnote(s):<\/u><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">28<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">https:\/\/investmentpolicy.unctad.org\/investment-dispute-settlement\/country\/226\/uzbekistan\/investor.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Has jurisdiction been used to seat non-ICSID investment treaty proceedings? If so, please provide details.<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>There is no publicly available information of non-ICSID investment treaty arbitrations seated in Uzbekistan.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Please set out (i) the interim and \/ or preliminary measures available in your jurisdiction in support of investment treaty proceedings, and (ii) the court practice in granting such measures.<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p><strong>i) Available interim measures<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Uzbekistan has not implemented specific provisions for interim measures in support of investment treaty proceedings. There is neither publicly available court practice in Uzbekistan in support of investment treaty proceedings.<\/p>\n<p>Uzbek domestic legislation only stipulates in Article 28<sup>1<\/sup> and Chapter 29<sup>1<\/sup> of the Code of Economic Procedure of the Republic of Uzbekistan (CEP) that national courts have the authority to grant interim relief in support of international commercial arbitration and to recognize and enforce arbitral awards on interim measures in support of international commercial arbitration conducted under the Uzbek Law \u201cOn International Commercial Arbitration\u201d of 2021 (LICA).<\/p>\n<p>That said, Uzbekistan has taken institutional steps to promote arbitration of investment-related disputes. In 2018, a Presidential Resolution \u201cOn the establishment of the Tashkent International Arbitration Center (TIAC) under the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Republic of Uzbekistan\u201d expressly envisaged the resolution of disputes relating to investments, intellectual property, and blockchain technologies through international arbitration. Where parties, including state entities, have agreed to submit disputes to arbitration under the TIAC Arbitration Rules, they may also take advantage of the interim relief provisions envisages by the Rules, if any.<\/p>\n<p>The TIAC Arbitration Rules 2021 provide an internal mechanism for interim relief. Article 25.1 empowers arbitral tribunals to order interim measures, while Article 25.2 allows parties to seek urgent interim or conservatory relief prior to the constitution of the tribunal. Article 25.3 further clarifies that recourse to interim measures ordered by a tribunal or a court does not constitute a waiver of the arbitration agreement or incompatibility with the TIAC Arbitration Rules.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(ii) Court practice<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>As stated above, there is no publicly available court practice in Uzbekistan in support of investment treaty proceedings.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Please set out any default procedures applicable to appointment of arbitrators and also the Court's practice of invoking such procedures particularly in the context of investment treaty arbitrations seated in your home state.<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>As with interim measures, Uzbekistan does not have specific default procedures applicable to appointment of arbitrators in support of investment treaty proceedings. In investment treaty proceedings, the constitution of arbitral tribunals is determined by the dispute settlement mechanism agreed by the parties, most commonly under the ICSID Convention and its Arbitration Rules, the ICSID Additional Facility Rules, or <em>ad hoc<\/em> arbitration conducted pursuant to the UNCITRAL or PCA Arbitration Rules.<\/p>\n<p>Uzbek domestic legislation regulates the default appointment of arbitrators only in relation to international commercial arbitration. Article 16 of the LICA establishes fallback appointment procedures in circumstances where the parties have failed to reach agreement.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In the context of awards issued in non-ICSID investment treaty arbitrations seated in your jurisdiction, please set out (i) the grounds available in your jurisdiction on which such awards can be annulled or set aside, and (ii) the court practice in applying these grounds.<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p><strong>(i) Grounds for annulment<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>In Uzbekistan, there are no specific provisions stating the grounds on which non-ICSID award can be annulled or set aside.<\/p>\n<p>In commercial arbitration, applications to set aside arbitral awards are regulated by Article 50 of the LICA and relevant provisions of CEP (Article 232<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">5<\/sup>). An arbitral award may be annulled solely on limited grounds, which mirror those set out in the UNCITRAL Model Law. These include, in particular, the following:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>a party to the arbitration agreement lacked capacity or the arbitration agreement was invalid;<\/li>\n<li>a party was not given proper notice of the appointment of an arbitrator or the arbitral proceedings, or was otherwise unable to present its case;<\/li>\n<li>the award deals with a dispute not contemplated by or falling outside the scope of the arbitration agreement;<\/li>\n<li>the composition of the tribunal or the arbitral procedure did not comply with the parties\u2019 agreement or mandatory provisions of Uzbek law;<\/li>\n<li>the subject matter of the dispute is not arbitrable under Uzbek law;<\/li>\n<li>the award is contrary to the public policy of the Republic of Uzbekistan.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>An application for setting aside must be filed within three months from the date on which the applicant received the award. The court is expressly prohibited from reviewing the merits of the dispute. Where an award is set aside, this does not prevent the parties from re-submitting the dispute to arbitration, provided the arbitration agreement remains valid.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(ii) Court practice<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>There are no publicly reported cases in which Uzbek courts or authorities have relied on Article 50 of the LICA in the context of non-ICSID investor-state dispute.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In the context of ICSID awards, please set out: (i) the grounds available in your jurisdiction on which such awards can be challenged and (ii) the court practice in applying these grounds.<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Generally, ICSID awards cannot be challenged or annulled before courts in Uzbekistan. As a party to the ICSID Convention, Uzbekistan recognises that such awards are final and binding, and must be enforced as if they were domestic court judgments.<\/p>\n<p>Any attempt to contest an ICSID award is therefore limited to the Convention\u2019s own annulment procedure under Article 52, which provides narrowly defined grounds, including:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>improper constitution of the tribunal;<\/li>\n<li>manifest excess of powers;<\/li>\n<li>corruption of a tribunal member;<\/li>\n<li>serious procedural irregularities;<\/li>\n<li>failure to state the reasons for the award.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Annulment requests are considered by ICSID <em>ad hoc<\/em> committees, and Uzbek courts have no authority to review, modify, or set aside ICSID awards.<\/p>\n<p>There is no publicly available court practice in Uzbekistan challenging ICSID awards.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">To what extent can sovereign immunity (from suit and\/or execution) be invoked in your jurisdiction in the context of enforcement of investment treaty awards.<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The ability of a State to invoke sovereign immunity from suit and\/or execution is not specified in the Uzbek legislation. Uzbekistan is not a party to the 2004 UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property, and the LOI does not contain express provisions addressing State immunity from either jurisdiction or enforcement.<\/p>\n<p>For the purposes of ICSID arbitrations, by virtue of Article 25(1) of the ICSID Convention, Contracting States, including Uzbekistan, have given consent to ICSID jurisdiction.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Please outline the grounds on which recognition and enforcement of ICSID awards can be resisted under any relevant legislation or case law. Please also set out any notable examples of how such grounds have been applied in practice.<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Uzbek legislation does not specify the requirements with respect to the request for enforcement of an ICSID award. There is no publicly available Uzbek case law regarding the application of any grounds to resist recognition and enforcement of ICSID awards.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Please outline the practice in your jurisdiction, as requested in the above question, but in relation to non-ICSID investment treaty awards.<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Non-ICSID investment treaty awards may be recognised and enforced pursuant to the New York Convention and to the CEP. Article 254 of the CEP expressly provides that state courts, when considering cases decided by the foreign arbitral tribunal, may not review an arbitral award on the merits.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">29<\/sup><\/p>\n<p>As to the grounds for refusal of recognition and enforcement of a foreign arbitral award, they are enumerated in Article 256 of the CEP and in major part mirror the grounds for refusal enumerated in Article V(1) of the New York Convention. Paragraph 6 of Part 1 of Article 256 of the CEP introduces one more ground for refusal &#8211; \u201c<em>if the dispute was resolved by an incompetent foreign arbitration<\/em>.\u201d Another additional ground stems from Paragraph 3 of Part 2 of Article 256 of the CEP. Pursuant to those provisions, recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award may also be refused where the applicable three-year limitation period<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">30<\/sup> has lapsed.<\/p>\n<p>Article 256 of the CEP enumerates the following grounds for challenge similar to those stated in the New York Convention:<\/p>\n<p>(a) parties to the arbitration agreement were, under the law applicable to them, under some incapacity, or the arbitration agreement is not valid under the law to which parties have subjected it or, failing any indication thereon, under the law of the country where the arbitral award was made;<\/p>\n<p>(b) a party against whom the award is invoked was not given proper notice of the appointment of the arbitrator or of the arbitration proceedings or was otherwise unable to present his case;<\/p>\n<p>(c) the arbitration award has been made on a dispute which is not provided for or does not fall under the terms of the arbitration agreement or arbitration clause in the agreement, or contains resolutions on the issues that extend beyond the scope of the arbitration agreement or the arbitration clause in the agreement, except for cases where resolutions on the issues covered by the arbitration agreement or clause therein may be separated from those not covered by such an agreement or a clause;<\/p>\n<p>(d) the composition of the arbitral authority or the arbitral procedure was not in accordance with the agreement of parties, or, failing such agreement, was not in accordance with the law of the country where the arbitration took place;<\/p>\n<p>(e) the award has not yet become binding on parties, or has been set aside or suspended by a competent authority of the country in which, or under the law of which, that award was made.<\/p>\n<p>Recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award may be also refused on the following three additional grounds:<\/p>\n<p>(a) subject matter of a dispute is not capable of settlement by arbitration under Uzbek laws;<\/p>\n<p>(b) recognition or enforcement of an award would be contrary to the public policy of Uzbekistan.<\/p>\n<p><u>Footnote(s):<\/u><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">29<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">Article 254 of the CEP available at https:\/\/lex.uz\/docs\/3523895.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">30<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">Ibid., Article 248 of the CEP.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">To what extent does your jurisdiction permit awards against states to be enforced against state-owned assets or the assets of state-owned or state-linked entities?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Uzbekistan has no dedicated statutory regime governing the enforcement of arbitral awards against state-owned assets or the assets of state-owned or state-linked entities.<\/p>\n<p>Under the general principles described in Articles 79\u201380 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan, the State participates in civil relations through competent bodies, but does not automatically answer for the debts of separate legal entities, and such entities do not answer for the debts of the State, absent a specific legal basis (e.g., an express guarantee).<\/p>\n<p>In <em>Romak SA v Republic of Uzbekistan<\/em> (Cour de cassation, 5 March 2014),<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">31<\/sup> French courts lifted an attachment over funds derived from air navigation charges, treating them as sovereign revenues covered by immunity from execution; any waiver in pledge documents in favor of other creditors was read narrowly and creditor-specifically, not as a general waiver.<\/p>\n<p>We are unaware of any publicly available cases where a court in Uzbekistan has enforced an arbitral award against state-owned assets or the assets of a state-owned entity in the context of an investment treaty arbitration.<\/p>\n<p><u>Footnote(s):<\/u><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">31<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">La R\u00e9publique d&#8217;Ouzbekistan c. Romak SA Geneva, Cass. Civ. 1\u00e8re, 5 mars 2014, no. 12-22406, available at: https:\/\/www.legifrance.gouv.fr\/juri\/id\/JURITEXT000028703508\/; La R\u00e9publique d&#8217;Ouzbekistan c. Romak SA Geneva, Appel. Civ., P\u00f4le 1 &#8211; Chambre 5, 25 mai 2011, no. 11\/06213, available at: https:\/\/www.legifrance.gouv.fr\/juri\/id\/JURITEXT000024129623?p.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Please highlight any recent trends, legal, political or otherwise, that might affect your jurisdiction's use of arbitration generally or ISDS specifically.<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Uzbekistan is a rapidly developing country. To achieve its 2030 aim to become an upper middle-income nation, Uzbekistan has launched \u201c<em>a radical reform programme designed to liberalise the economy, attract foreign investment, dramatically expand the country\u2019s technological capacity and strategic infrastructure, and reduce regulatory burdens on businesses<\/em>\u201d.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">32<\/sup><\/p>\n<p>Uzbekistan\u2019s current foreign economic policy prioritizes strengthening economic diplomacy and expanding trade, investment, financial, and technological cooperation across multiple regions. In particular, the Government seeks to deepen strategic and economic ties with CIS countries, the European Union, the Asia-Pacific region, the United States, with a clear focus on increasing exports and attracting foreign investment.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">33<\/sup><\/p>\n<p>In order to expand foreign investment and enhance economic cooperation between certain nations ,<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">34<\/sup> over 2025, Uzbekistan has entered into two additional bilateral investment treaties with Italy and Jordan (yet to enter into force). It has also ratified the Bilateral Investment Treaty between the Government of Uzbekistan and India, signed on September 27, 2024.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">35<\/sup><\/p>\n<p>Over the past few years, Uzbekistan has actively developed its international commercial arbitration framework.<\/p>\n<p>First, in 2021, Uzbekistan adopted the LICA<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">36<\/sup> and amended the CEP to reflect the developments. With respect to commercial arbitration, over the years, Uzbek courts have generally demonstrated a pro-arbitration and pro-enforcement approach, even in cases against state-owned entities. According to LICA, the arbitral award, regardless of the country in which it was made, is recognized as binding, and must be enforced upon submission of a written application.<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">37<\/sup><\/p>\n<p>Second, established in 2018, the Tashkent International Arbitration Centre (TIAC) has rapidly gained prominence as a neutral and cost-efficient forum for international commercial disputes, involving parties from around the globe. TIAC has seen steady growth in cross-border cases, including disputes between non-Uzbek parties, reflecting its increasing international profile. In 2023, TIAC strengthened its position through the adoption of cross-institutional arbitration rules with the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC), combining TIAC\u2019s regional expertise and efficiency with HKIAC\u2019s global reputation. This development enhanced TIAC\u2019s role as a competitive platform for resolving cross-border disputes in the Eurasian and Asia-Pacific regions.<\/p>\n<p>In 2025, Uzbekistan has announced plans to establish the Tashkent International Commercial Court (TICC), which is intended to complement the TIAC \u201c<em>as an independent judicial body based on the principles and practices of common law, aimed at providing international investors with access to a fair and reliable legal institution<\/em>\u201d <sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">38<\/sup>. As explained by Diana Bayzakova, Director of the Tashkent International Arbitration Centre: \u201c<em>The establishment of the TICC provides investors with a choice. With arbitration, economic courts, and now the special International Commercial Court, Uzbekistan offers investors comprehensive conditions<\/em>\u201d<sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">39<\/sup>. Once operational, the TICC is anticipated to play a significant role in positioning Uzbekistan as a centre for international dispute resolution, offering market participants a credible and neutral judicial forum for cross-border commercial disputes.<\/p>\n<p><u>Footnote(s):<\/u><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">32<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">https:\/\/invest.gov.uz\/en\/reason\/strategy.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">33<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">See the Decree of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan \u201cOn the State Program for the Implementation of the Uzbekistan-2030 Strategy in the Year of Support for Youth and Business\u201d of 11 September 2023 No. \u0423\u041f-158, attaching \u201cSTRATEGY \u201cUZBEKISTAN &#8211; 2030\u201d\u201d available at: https:\/\/lex.uz\/docs\/6600404. (in Russian and Uzbek).<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">34<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">Uzbekistan and Jordan Sign 15 Bilateral Agreements to Strengthen Partnership. (26.08.2025). UZ Daily. Available at: https:\/\/www.uzdaily.uz\/en\/uzbekistan-and-jordan-sign-15-bilateral-agreements-to-strengthen-partnership\/. See also The Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) between India and Uzbekistan. The Embassy of India, Tashkent, Uzbekistan. Available at: https:\/\/eoitashkent.gov.in\/the-bilateral-investment-treaty-bit-between-india-and-uzbekistan\/#:~:text=India%20and%20Uzbekistan-,The%20Bilateral%20Investment%20Treaty%20(BIT)%20between%20India%20and%20Uzbekistan,effect%20from%2015th%20May%2C%202025; Uzbekistan and Italy strengthen the strategic partnership. (29.05.2025). The President of the Republic of Uzbekistan. Available at: https:\/\/president.uz\/en\/lists\/view\/8168.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">35<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">UNCTAD. International Investment Agreements Navigator. Uzbekistan, available at: https:\/\/investmentpolicy.unctad.org\/international-investment-agreements\/countries\/226\/uzbekistan.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">36<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">https:\/\/www.lex.uz\/docs\/5698676.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">37<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">The Law on International Commercial Arbitration of 2021, Article 51, available at: https:\/\/lex.uz\/docs\/5698676.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">38<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">Resolving International Disputes in Uzbekistan: The Tashkent International Commercial Court. (10.06.2025). The Ministry of Investment, Industry and Trade of the Republic of Uzbekistan. Available at: https:\/\/gov.uz\/en\/miit\/news\/view\/60022.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><sup style=\"font-size: 9px\">39<\/sup> <span style=\"font-size: 12px\">Ibid.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Please highlight any other investment treaty related developments in your jurisdiction to the extent not covered above (for e.g., impact of the Achmea decisions, decisions concerning treaty interpretation, appointment of and challenges to arbitrators, immunity of arbitrators, third-party funding and other non-conventional means of financing such proceedings).<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The recent India \u2013 Uzbekistan BIT (2024), expressly excludes third-party funding.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\r\n<div class=\"word-count-hidden\" style=\"display:none;\">Estimated word count: <span class=\"word-count\">7131<\/span><\/div>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t<\/ol>\r\n\r\n<script type=\"text\/javascript\" src=\"\/wp-content\/themes\/twentyseventeen\/src\/jquery\/components\/filter-guides.js\" async><\/script><\/div>"}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comparative_guide\/130340","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comparative_guide"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/comparative_guide"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=130340"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}