Skip to main content
International Arbitration Forum

Goldgroup Resources, Inc. v. United Mexican States

Case summary

At a glance

Parties
Goldgroup Resources, Inc. v. United Mexican States
Case no.
ICSID Case No. ARB/23/4
Forum and rules
ICSID Convention arbitration under the ICSID Arbitration Rules in force as of 1 July 2022, as modified by NAFTA Chapter 11, Section B; place of proceeding Washington, D.C.
Treaty
NAFTA Chapter 11
Tribunal
Prof. Eduardo Zuleta (President), Mr. Henri C. Álvarez, Ms. Jean E. Kalicki
Sector
Gold mining
Outcome
Pending. The published documents are procedural orders only and do not show a decision on jurisdiction, merits or damages.

The dispute

Goldgroup Resources, Inc. brought a NAFTA Chapter 11 claim against Mexico concerning its shareholding in DynaResource de Mexico, S.A. de C.V. (DynaMex), linked to the San José de Gracia gold mine. The published procedural orders do not set out the measures complained of. They show that damages are disputed, including the value of Goldgroup's DynaMex shares, the relevance of the Ocean Partners Transaction as an indicator of value, and Mexico's position that the value assigned to the shares on a book-value basis was adequate compensation under NAFTA Article 1110. Mexico also raised an objection to jurisdiction, which was briefed alongside the merits.

Key holdings

  1. The proceeding is governed by the ICSID Convention, the 2022 ICSID Arbitration Rules as modified by NAFTA Chapter 11, Section B, and the rules in Procedural Order No. 1. English and Spanish are both procedural languages, and the award is to be rendered in both, each version equally authentic. Procedural Order No. 1, §§ 1.1, 12.1, 12.15
  2. Hearings are closed to the public, but representatives of the other NAFTA Parties may attend. Non-disputing NAFTA Parties may file Article 1128 submissions. Pleadings, evidence and transcripts are not to be published, and the transparency regime is dealt with in Procedural Order No. 2. Procedural Order No. 1, §§ 22.7, 25, 28
  3. The Tribunal decided the Parties' document production requests in annexed Redfern schedules and ordered production by 4 September 2024. Its rulings are not an indication of its views on the merits or on whether either Party has discharged its burden of proof. Procedural Order No. 4, ¶¶ 12–14
  4. The Tribunal refused the Claimant's open-ended request for its damages experts to address new points and new developments at the hearing. Such a general request would not respect § 19.5 of Procedural Order No. 1, procedural fairness or equality of arms. Procedural Order No. 6, ¶ 15
  5. Because the hearing originally set for September 2025 was postponed, the Claimant's experts may file a short supplemental report by 14 October 2025. The report is strictly limited to specified paragraphs of RIóN's Second Report and to updated market information on the San José de Gracia mine and on global resource prices. RIóN may reply by 4 November 2025, and no additional submissions by the Parties are allowed. Procedural Order No. 6, ¶¶ 16–21, 24
  6. The Claimant's expert may correct at the hearing any mischaracterisation of the expert report on the book-value methodology. All three of the Claimant's damages experts may testify on their joint report, although the Respondent called only two of them. Procedural Order No. 6, ¶¶ 22–23

Procedural history

  1. 18 November 2022Notice of Intent.
  2. 17 February 2023Request for Arbitration filed.
  3. 6 September 2023Tribunal constituted.
  4. 9 November 2023Procedural Order No. 1 sets the procedural rules and timetable after the first session of 25 October 2023, held by videoconference. Procedural Order No. 2 on transparency is issued the same day.
  5. 6 May 2024Procedural Order No. 3 adopts a revised calendar agreed by the Parties, which provides for briefing on an objection to jurisdiction.
  6. 21 August 2024Procedural Order No. 4: decision on document production.
  7. 1 April 2025Procedural Order No. 5 further revises the calendar by agreement of the Parties.
  8. 23 June 2025Canada and the United States file NAFTA Article 1128 submissions.
  9. 23 September 2025Procedural Order No. 6 allows limited supplemental damages expert reports after the hearing originally set for September 2025 was postponed.
  10. 5 May 2026Procedural Order No. 7 issued (text not included in the published material summarised here).

Tribunal, counsel and experts

Decided by
For the claimant
DLA Piper México, S.C. · DLA Piper LLP (US)
For the respondent
Secretaría de Economía · Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP · Tereposky & DeRose LLP
Experts
Andrés Chambouleyron (claimant) · Santiago Dellepiane (claimant) · Andrew Webb (claimant) · RIóN M&A, S.C. (respondent)

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
ICSID Case No. ARB/23/4
Country
Treaty
North American Free Trade Agreement (1992)
United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (2018)
Documents
Section