Willkie is committed to being the firm of choice for our clients in their “bet-the-company” international arbitration disputes, which we deliver by combining legal prowess with strategic and commercially sound advice. Our focus is on high-profile disputes and complex matters involving high levels of business risk. 

We have built a multi-jurisdictional international arbitration practice comprised of highly experienced practitioners who are equally skilled in fighting commercial and investment arbitrations and representing clients in arbitration-related litigation proceedings through to the enforcement stage. We are particularly experienced in managing cases involving multiple fora.  

Every lawyer in our practice is trained to be a trial lawyer. We conduct our own advocacy and have built a recognized track record of success against other top tier firms.

Members of our team regularly sit as arbitrator and have acted as counsel in over 300 ad hoc and institutional arbitrations. Our experience spans all leading arbitral rules (including the ICC, LCIA, Swiss, HKIAC, DIS, SCAI, JAMS, AAA, NAI, ICSID, SCC, VIAC and UNCITRAL Rules) and disputed seated in both common and civil law jurisdictions (including London, New York, San Francisco, Hong Kong, Singapore, Dubai, Paris, Zurich, Geneva, Stockholm, Vienna, São Paolo and Germany). 

Our international arbitration offering extends to every type of client in any sector. We have acted for sovereign States, State-owned entities, multinational corporations, financial institutions and individuals in a range of industries, including energy and natural resources, aerospace, agriculture, biotechnology, pharmaceuticals and life sciences, construction, defense, financial services, private equity, consumer goods and insurance.  

A key strength of our practice is its diversity, which we harness by operating as a highly integrated team across offices to ensure that our clients get the bespoke service that their case requires. Our team has lawyers admitted in numerous key civil and common law jurisdictions, including England and Wales, France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Russia, Singapore, Lebanon, New Zealand, Brazil, and in the United States, in New York, California and Washington, D.C., among others. That diversity also means our lawyers are fluent and capable of practicing law in a variety of languages including Arabic, Chinese (Mandarin and Cantonese), French, Spanish, Portuguese, English, Russian, German and Italian. 

Members of the practice have been recognized for the strength of our written and oral advocacy by leading industry publications, including Chambers & Partners, The Legal 500, The Lawyer, Forbes, Who’s Who Legal, Law360 and Benchmark Litigation.


AlixPartners LLP v. Fund for Protection of Investor Rights in Foreign States (U.S. Sup. Ct)

  • Successfully challenged a Second Circuit decision that limits the ability of parties to an arbitration abroad to compel discovery through orders from the federal courts. In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the U.S. Supreme Court limited the scope of 28 U.S.C. § 1782, which empowers federal district courts to order persons or entities within their jurisdiction to provide testimony and produce documents “for use in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal.” This significant decision will impact international arbitration for businesses by foreclosing wide-ranging United States discovery in many cases. 

Crystallex International Corporation v. Venezuela & Ors (U.S. CA, 3d. Cir)

  • CITGO Petroleum Corporation and PDV Holding Inc. in enforcement proceedings that have been brought by several award-creditors against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, including Crystallex that is seeking to enforce a $1.4 billion ICSID award. CITGO is indirectly wholly owned by Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), the Venezuelan state oil company, and has been described as the “crown jewel” of the State’s foreign assets given its value to the Venezuelan energy sector. 

Dynasty Co. for Oil and Gas Trading Ltd v. KRG and Dr. Ashti Hawrami (England & Wales HC) 

  • The Minister for Natural Resources of the KRG (Dr. Hawrami) in dismissing a $1.68 billion claim on jurisdictional and state immunity grounds.

Devas Multimedia Pvt Ltd v Antrix Corporation Ltd (Paris CA)

  • Devas in the exequatur and subsequent challenge of a $650 million ICC arbitration award rendered against a State-owned entity.

Deripaska and Danilina v. Chernukhin (England & Wales CA) 

  • The respondent in successfully resisting English High Court and Court of Appeal challenges to an arbitral award for $100 million.

Valeri Belokon v. Kyrgyz Republic (French Cour de Cassation)

  • The Kyrgyz Republic in proceedings to set aside an award for $15 million.

*Some of the matters listed were handled by members of the practice prior to joining Willkie.


American Multinational Company v Asian Multinational Company, ICC

  • A large American multinational company in a multibillion-dollar ICC arbitration arising out of breaches of a technology sharing agreement entered into in the context of a long-term joint venture. 

Insurance Company v. Private Equity firms, ICC 

  • The buyer in a post-closing M&A dispute concerning the acquisition of an insurance company in Korea. Obtained an award of over $230 million and acting for the buyer in enforcement proceedings in Korea and related court proceedings in Hong Kong.

Symphony, NGI & DLV v. Fullerton & KPN EH, ICC 

  • Three Hong Kong companies in parallel ICC arbitrations in excess of $1 billion relating to the sale of one of the largest renewable energy companies in South-East Asia. 

Kurdistan Regional Government of Iraq (KRG) v. Dana Gas and Ors., LCIA 

  • The KRG in one of the largest LCIA arbitrations ever pursued, with claims quantified at over $35 billion. The arbitration was settled on terms favorable to our client. 

Asian State and State-Owned Entity v. International Oil Companies, ICC & UNCITRA

  • An Asian Government and Government-owned entity in related UNCITRAL ($1.3 billion) and ICC ($1.5 billion) arbitrations arising out of two production sharing agreements, and advised the Government in relation to potential investment claims. The arbitrations were settled on terms favorable to our clients.

Belgian Multinational Group of Companies v German Insolvency Receiver, ICC

  • A large Belgian multinational group of companies in a €700 million ICC arbitration seated in Germany and governed by German law arising out of a global carve-out and sale of a significant business unit.

American Multinational Company v Asian Subsidiary of an American Multinational Company, AAA

  • A large American multinational company in a $445 million AAA arbitration arising out of the termination of an agreement for the manufacture and supply of printer products

Multinational Chemical Company v. Caribbean State-Owned Energy Company, Ad Hoc

  • A multinational chemical company in two ad hoc arbitrations quantified at over $250 million against a State-owned energy company relating to gas supply agreements. The arbitrations were settled on terms favorable to our client.

American Computer Software Company v. Global Electronic Design Automation Company, ICC

  • An American technology company in an ICC arbitration over the licensing rights to electronic design automation products arising from a patent license and settlement agreement. The primary relief sought was declaratory in nature and is estimated to be worth in excess of $100 million.

Joint Venture Dispute, LCIA 

  • An ultra-high net worth individual in a shareholder dispute with a Russian oligarch concerning a joint venture investment. Obtained an award of nearly $100 million and resisted challenges to the award in the English High Court and Court of Appeal. 

American Private Equity Firm v. American Private Equity Firm, ICC

  • A leading American private equity firm in two related $500 million ICC arbitrations arising out of a share purchase agreement for an acquisition in Brazil. The arbitrations were settled on terms favorable to our client.

European Pharmaceutical Company v. Asian Pharmaceutical Company, ICC

  • A leading European pharmaceutical company in a $1.5 billion ICC arbitration arising out of royalty payment disputes under a licensing agreement with an Asian pharmaceutical company.  

Global Insurance Company vs. Latin American Banking Group, SCAI

  • A global insurance company in a Swiss Rules arbitration quantified at over $2 billion against a Latin American banking group relating to a M&A transaction. The arbitration settled on terms favorable to our client.

*Some of the matters listed were handled by members of the practice prior to joining Willkie.


Armenian Investors v. Republic of Azerbaijan

  • A class of Armenian investors in relation to claims arising out of damage to investments during the 44-day armed conflict known as the “Second Karabakh War.” This is the first publicly known investor-State dispute arising out of the conflict.

Penwell Business Ltd v. Kyrgyz Republic, Ad Hoc

  • The Kyrgyz Republic in defending a $298 million investment claim by a BVI incorporated company relating to the State’s largest telecommunications company. Obtained an award dismissing the claim on admissibility grounds.

VIP Kyrgyzstan Holdings AG &  Menacrest AG v. Kyrgyz Republic, Ad Hoc 

  • The Kyrgyz Republic in a $74 million investment arbitration concerning the State’s second-largest telecommunications company. 

PJSC RusHydro v. Kyrgyz Republic, Ad Hoc 

  • The Kyrgyz Republic in a Hong Kong seated UNCITRAL arbitration worth $37 million concerning the construction and operation of a set of hydroelectric plants. 

National Center on Complex Processing of Mineral Raw Materials of the Republic of Kazakhstan v. Kyrgyz Republic, Ad Hoc

  • The Kyrgyz Republic in a $49 million investment arbitration concerning a metallurgical plant project

JSC QazaqGaz (f.k.a KazTransGaz) v. Kyrgyz Republic, Ad Hoc

  • The Kyrgyz Republic in an investment arbitration concerning a gas pipeline network.

UAB Garsu Pasaulis v. Kyrgyz Republic, Ad Hoc

  • The Kyrgyz Republic in an investment arbitration concerning a public tender for the production of biometric passports

International Mining Company Invest, Inc. v. Kyrgyz Republic, ICSID

  • The Kyrgyz Republic in the first-ever ICSID case brought against the State; the dispute concerns a uranium mining project.