Skip to main content
International Arbitration Forum

Litco v. Kazahstan et al.

Case summary

At a glance

Parties
Litco, LLC v. Arcanum (Asia) Limited v. BTA Bank JSC, City of Almaty, Republic of Kazakhstan, and Republic of Kazakhstan
Case no.
ICDR Case No. 01-18-0003-7960
Forum and rules
International Centre for Dispute Resolution; AAA Commercial Arbitration Rules
Tribunal
Christopher K. Tahbaz (Presiding Arbitrator); the other two arbitrators are not named in the published document
Outcome
Arbitration terminated under Rule 57(f) of the AAA Commercial Arbitration Rules on 9 July 2022 because the advances on costs were not paid.

The dispute

The only published document is Procedural Order No. 7. It does not describe the merits of the dispute. The order names the parties as Litco, LLC, Arcanum (Asia) Limited, BTA Bank JSC, the City of Almaty and the Republic of Kazakhstan. The order deals only with the parties' failure to pay the advances on arbitrator compensation and expenses that Rule 56 of the AAA Commercial Arbitration Rules requires. The copy was filed as Document 414-1 in US federal court case 1:19-cv-02645-JGK-KHP on 12 July 2022.

Key holdings

  1. The ICDR told the Tribunal that one party had not paid its share of the advances. Because of this, the ICDR could not pay in full the interim invoices that two of the arbitrators had sent in November 2021. Recitals A–B
  2. The parties kept failing to pay. On 7 February 2022 the Tribunal suspended the arbitration by Procedural Order No. 6 under Rule 57(e). Recital C
  3. Counsel for the Claimant asked for more time. By email of 7 June 2022 the Tribunal extended the payment deadline to 5 pm (New York time) on 7 July 2022. It said this deadline would not be extended again and that it expected to terminate the arbitration if the deposit was not paid in full. Recital D
  4. The parties paid no further advances after Procedural Order No. 6 or the 7 June 2022 email. The Tribunal therefore terminated the arbitration under Rule 57(f) of the AAA Commercial Arbitration Rules. Operative part

Procedural history

  1. November 2021Two arbitrators sent interim invoices. The ICDR could not pay them in full because the advances had not been fully paid.
  2. 7 February 2022Procedural Order No. 6 suspended the arbitration under Rule 57(e).
  3. 7 June 2022At the Claimant's request, the Tribunal extended the payment deadline to 7 July 2022 and said it would not extend it again.
  4. 9 July 2022Procedural Order No. 7 terminated the arbitration under Rule 57(f) for non-payment of the advances.
  5. 12 July 2022The order was filed as Document 414-1 in US federal court case 1:19-cv-02645-JGK-KHP.

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by

Run a conflict check on these names →

Keywords

Summary generated with AI from the published documents — refer to the award for the authoritative text.

Case ID
ICDR Case No. 01-18-0003-7960
Documents