GBS Disputes

Experience as Counsel includes advice to and/or representation of:

Commercial disputes

• Subsidiaries of a Gulf sovereign wealth fund in two ICC arbitrations in Switzerland initiated against related companies of a European real estate investment group and its ultimate beneficial owner. The dispute arises from the breach of various finance agreements. Over EUR 850 million is at stake. The law of the Respondents’ State of nationality applies.
• A supplier of nuclear technology in disputes with a nuclear power plant (NPP) contractor arising under three contracts for the supply, erection and maintenance of nuclear equipment.
• The Latin American subsidiary of a European energy company, Claimant in an ICC arbitration in Paris against a European LNG supplier. The dispute arises from an LNG Sale and Purchase Agreement. New York law applies.
• A European energy company in a gas pricing arbitration under a major long term gas supply agreement. Over EUR 1 billion was at stake.
• A Middle Eastern subcontractor in a dispute with a contractor in relation to a major infrastructure project in the Middle East.
• A national oil company in a dispute arising from the impact of shortfalls under a major upstream concession on the company’s own supply obligations under its long-term downstream sale agreement with the concession holder.
• A national oil company in a dispute with a foreign supplier in relation to the disruption of supply following the outbreak of a regional war.
• A Middle Eastern State-owned entity with respect to the termination of an oil concession following the failure of the contractor to meet its technical and financial obligations.
• A Middle Eastern national oil and gas company in three disputes (and associated negotiation) with a major international oil company respectively relating to the review of the price applicable under a long-term natural gas supply agreement, the correct invoicing procedure under that agreement, and the allocation of gas between the partners. The law of the Middle Eastern State applies. Over USD 2 billion is at stake.
• A leading European energy company and its Asian subsidiary, Claimants in an ICC arbitration in Singapore against three Asian State-owned nuclear power companies. The arbitration concerned a shareholders’ dispute arising from the unilateral adoption by the Asian companies of corporate measures which would have had the effect of preventing our client from receiving one third of its share of the profits to be generated by the nuclear power plant throughout the assets’ technical life. The law of the Respondents’ State applied. The Tribunal found that the measures adopted by the Respondents were in breach of the shareholders’ agreement, issued relief to protect our clients’ share of future profits, and ordered the Respondents to pay 75% of our clients’ legal fees.
• Vilnius City Municipality and the Municipality-owned district heating company in an SCC arbitration in Vilnius against Veolia Environnement S.A. and a Lithuanian subsidiary. The dispute concerned the operation and management of a 15-year district heating concession in Vilnius and Lithuanian law applied. Veolia initiated the arbitration and advanced claims in the region of EUR 50 million. Our clients counterclaimed and secured an award in their favour for a net value of approximately EUR 56 million.
• A Middle Eastern national oil company in several interrelated disputes including disputes concerning (i) the quantities of refined products to which our client is entitled under an offtake and sales agreement, (ii) its shareholding rights in the company which owns the refinery as well as (iii) its rights and liability as a guarantor of the company towards the company’s lenders. The law of the Middle Eastern State applies to the first and the second disputes. The law of a European State applies to the third dispute. Over USD 500 million is globally at stake.
• A Middle Eastern national oil company in 11 disputes against an international oil company. The disputes concerned inflated cost recovery claimed and collected by the IOC and its predecessor in title under 11 concession agreements. The law of the Middle Eastern State applied. More than USD 250 million was at stake.
• A natural gas seller in an ICC arbitration in Paris and in two CRCICA arbitrations in Cairo and Madrid initiated by the buyer and owner of a liquefaction plant. The arbitrations, which involved claims in excess of USD 4 billion, arose under a tolling agreement governed by English law and a related long-term gas supply agreement governed by Egyptian law. In a precedent-setting award on the English law of assignment, the ICC Tribunal dismissed the USD 300 million claim brought against our client. In another ground-breaking decision on the application of the ICSID Convention, the Madrid-seated Tribunal equally dismissed the entirety of the USD 3.6 billion claim brought against our client. Finally, in the Cairo-seated CRCICA arbitration, the Tribunal dismissed the USD 10 million claim brought against our client.
• An Asian LNG buyer in gas price review proceedings against an Australian supplier.
• Two State-owned entities in a USD 6 billion ICC arbitration in Geneva and a USD 4 billion CRCICA arbitration in Cairo arising out of a long-term gas supply contract relating to the export of Egyptian gas to Israel. English law applied to both arbitrations. More than three quarters of the Claimants’ claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction or on the merits. Following these decisions, the parties reached a global settlement for less than 5% of the claim.
• The Dow Chemical Company in an ICC arbitration in London against Kuwaiti State-owned Petrochemical Industries Company (PIC) arising out of the failure of the latter to close a large joint venture transaction. English and Kuwaiti law applied. Dow was awarded more than USD 2.47 billion, the then largest commercial award ever rendered.
• A State-owned entity in two disputes with two States arising from the performance of two long-term gas supply agreements. The law of the State-owned entity and international law applied.
• An oil producer as Respondent in an ICC arbitration in Stockholm relating to the consequences of social unrest on the parties’ ability to perform an oil concession agreement. A favorable settlement for 20% of the amount claimed was reached.
• Two international construction contractors, Respondents in an ICC arbitration in London initiated by a Middle Eastern State-owned company. The dispute concerned the development of a world-class medical facility in the Middle East. The law of the Claimant’s State applied. Over USD 3.7 billion was at stake.
• A major fertilizer producer as Claimant in an ICC arbitration in London against an Asian conglomerate. The dispute arose from the breach of a sales contract. English law applied. The Arbitral Tribunal granted our client pre-award interest at the unprecedented rate of 8.5% and post-award interest at the rate of 8%.
• An oil & gas contractor in a dispute arising out of the breach by three Asian State-owned entities of two oil concession agreements.
• A major fertilizer producer, Claimant in an ICC arbitration in London against one of its distributors. The dispute arose out of the breach by the Respondent of a supply agreement. English law applied. A favorable settlement was reached.
• A State-owned company in a dispute arising out of the breach by a contractor of an oil concession agreement.
• A development company in an ICC arbitration in Doha initiated by a contractor. The dispute arose from a major urban development project in Qatar. Qatari law applied.
• A Middle Eastern company, Respondent in two ICC arbitrations in Paris initiated by a European bank. The dispute arose from the termination of a facility agreement granted by the Claimant for the construction and management of a high standard hospital in the Middle East, as well as from the guarantee relating to the construction agreement. French law applied.
• A major bank in connection with claims of approximately USD 1 billion aimed at recovering losses arising from derivative positions during the 2008 financial crisis.
• A high net worth individual in an ICC arbitration in Geneva related to the dissolution of a long-standing family partnership. The law of a Gulf State applies. Billions of dollars are at stake.
• An African petrochemical company in an ICC arbitration with a North American company. The dispute arose from a Marketing and Off-Take Agreement governed by English law. Over USD 170 million was at stake.
• Four Middle Eastern and Asian companies, Respondents in an ICC arbitration in Singapore against 12 Asian Claimants. The dispute concerned a shareholders’ agreement. Over USD 5 billion was in dispute and the dispute was subject to Korean law.
• A petrochemical company in an ICC arbitration against a State-owned energy company. The dispute arose from a long-term gas supply agreement. Over USD 350 million was at stake.
• A manufacturer of industrial chemicals in a dispute with a buyer arising from a contract for the commercialization and sale of a chemical produced by our client. The contract was governed by Swiss law and subject to ICC arbitration in Zurich.

Investment disputes

• A Middle Eastern State, Respondent in a UNCITRAL arbitration initiated by Middle Eastern investors. The dispute, which involves claims in excess of USD 34.8 billion, arises from the alleged expropriation and mistreatment of investments in seven real estate projects. The proceedings are administered by the Permanent Court of Arbitration.
• The Arab Republic of Egypt, Respondent in a UNCITRAL arbitration initiated by four Middle Eastern investors in connection with the alleged violation of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) Agreement. The dispute arises from the alleged expropriation and mistreatment of investments in major commercial and touristic real estate projects in Egypt. USD 52 billion is at stake. We succeeded in obtaining the dismissal of claims totalling USD 30 billion, with the remaining claims now being briefed by the parties on the merits.
• A State in a dispute between its customs authority and the supplier of technological infrastructure.
• The Arab Republic of Egypt, Respondent in two parallel ICSID and UNCITRAL arbitrations arising from a concession for the distribution of natural gas in one of Egypt’s largest governorates. The Claimants sought USD 190 million in damages under the Canada-Egypt and Egypt-UAE bilateral investment treaties in respect of the annulment of a commercial arbitral award by the Egyptian courts, the alleged failure to protect the assets of the Claimants’ company during the Egyptian revolution of 2011, the non-extension of the concession to cover a new phase, and the subsequent termination of the entire concession. We succeeded in obtaining the full dismissal of all claims, some on jurisdictional grounds and the remaining claims on the merits.
• The Republic of Georgia in an ICSID arbitration brought by U.S. investors under the Georgia-U.S. bilateral investment treaty. The dispute arises from the alleged mistreatment of Magticom, Georgia’s leading telecommunication company, including the investigation, arrest and detention of its founder and majority shareholder, the son-in-law of former Georgian President Eduard Shevardnadze, by the Government of President Mikhail Saakashvili in the aftermath of the 2003 Rose Revolution.
• The Republic of Angola in an SCC emergency arbitration initiated by Carlos Manuel de São Vicente regarding allegations of wrongful imprisonment and mismanagement of funds in breach of the Angola-Portugal bilateral investment treaty. All claims against our client were dismissed and the Claimant was ordered to pay our client’s full legal costs.
• An African State in an ICSID arbitration arising from the termination of a mining concession.
• The Arab Republic of Egypt, Respondent in two investment arbitrations concerning alleged violations under the Egypt-Poland, Egypt-U.S. and the Egypt-Germany bilateral investment treaties relating to the performance of a long-term contract for the export of Egyptian natural gas to Israel. Around USD 2 billion was claimed. More than two thirds of the claims were dismissed on jurisdictional grounds and on the merits. Following these decisions, the parties reached a global settlement, under which all claims against our clients were waived without our clients being required to make any payment.
• A European investor in an ICC arbitration in Paris against the Republic of Kosovo. The dispute arose from investments in petrol stations and petrol storage facilities. The claims were brought, inter alia, under the 2014 Kosovo Foreign Investment Law.
• A State as Respondent in an arbitration under the UNCITRAL Rules, administered by the Permanent Court of Arbitration, in relation to a petrochemical plant. Over USD 2 billion was at stake. A settlement for less than ten percent of the claim was achieved.
• A State in an investment arbitration arising in connection with the termination of a mining concession. Over USD 150 million was at stake.
• The Arab Republic of Egypt in an ICSID arbitration initiated by an Emirati developer. The claim was brought under the UAE-Egypt bilateral investment treaty. The dispute arose from three land development projects.
• The Arab Republic of Egypt in an ICSID arbitration initiated by a Kuwaiti investor. The claim was brought under the Egypt-Kuwait bilateral investment treaty and arose in respect of the operation of a fertilizer plant and an associated long-term gas supply agreement.

Advisory work

Mohamed regularly advises companies regarding their contractual portfolio and on how to manage potential liability and mitigate litigation risk through dispute-minded contract drafting and corporate structure optimization. He advises governments and State entities on the restructuring of their respective energy and mining sectors. His recent experience includes:

• Advising a State-owned company in connection with a cross-border pipeline project and associated processing agreements.
• Advising a major oil company on two long-term services agreement for the charter of Floating Storage Regasification Units (FSRU) and the provision of regasification services.
• Advising a State on the negotiation of a treaty regarding joint exploration of hydrocarbons.
• Advising a major oil company on a series of agreements to effect a multi-billion dollar settlement through amendments of existing concessions, sale of assets and grant of right regarding exported products.
• In view of shortfalls under import agreements entered into by a major oil company, reviewing and assessing all export agreements, including with several major IOCs in order to minimise the quantities to be supplied under the export agreements and to use the available products for domestic consumption.
• Advising a major oil company on its anticipated acquisition of a stake in a major gas field in a neighbouring country and its construction of an associated processing facility, including investment treaty advice, the structuring of the investment vehicle, and the drafting of all associated upstream, midstream and downstream contracts.
• Representing and advising the Government of Egypt and the Egyptian Mineral Resources Authority in respect of the negotiation and drafting of two gold mining concessions with two leading international mining companies.
• Representing the Arab Republic of Egypt in the negotiation of a Memorandum of Understanding with inter alia the European Union regarding exports of East Mediterranean natural gas into the E.U.
• Representing an energy company in (i) the negotiation and drafting of agreements/treaties for the import of gas produced in Eastern Mediterranean gas fields, its transportation through a network of marine pipelines to be created, its treatment and liquefaction and its export as LNG and (ii) the settlement of associated disputes between LNG buyers and the energy company.
• Advice to a number of national oil and gas companies on updating their general terms and conditions relating to import and export of hydrocarbons to take into account the new risk profile and risk allocation resulting from the U.S. and E.U. sanctions against Russia.
• Advising a State-owned entity in the Arabian Gulf regarding their model agreements and their corporate structure.
• Advising the Egyptian Ministry of Petroleum on the restructuring of Egypt’s oil and gas sector.
• Advising the Egyptian Ministry of Petroleum on the legal instruments aiming at liberalizing the Egyptian gas market, allowing private companies to import, buy, transport and sell natural gas, including advising on the relevant legislation to be enacted and on the code that will govern the use of the national grid by private parties.
• Advising a State entity with respect to the creation of an oil & gas market regulator and the adoption of a statute and a code governing trading and transportation of natural gas and other petroleum products.
• Advising energy companies regarding their contractual portfolio.
• Representing and advising the Arab Republic of Egypt, EGAS and EGPC regarding the conception, negotiation, drafting and implementation of over forty agreements with Union Fenosa Gas S.A. (UFG), Spanish Egyptian Gas Company S.A.E. (SEGAS), Eni S.p.A. (Eni) and Naturgy Energy Group, S.A. regarding liquefaction and export of gas through, and ownership of, the Damietta Liquefied Natural Gas (DLNG) plant. The negotiation of this transaction lasted over two years and involved seven different parties, in addition to affiliates of some of those parties. The transaction settled all disputes between the parties under two different contracts and a bilateral investment treaty and allowed for the resumption of operations at the Damietta plant, which had been idle for nearly 10 years. It also (i) modified the shareholding structure of the owner of the plant, (ii) modified the allocation of the LNG produced by the plant, and (iii) regulated the supply of gas from EGAS to Eni for the next nine years.
• Advising a State-owned entity in the Arabian Gulf regarding the modernization of the group’s corporate structure to mitigate litigation risk.

Experience as arbitrator

Mohamed Shelbaya regularly acts as President, Sole arbitrator, and co-arbitrator in commercial and investment treaty arbitrations under the UNCITRAL, ICC, LCIA, and CRCICA rules. His recent experience includes acting as arbitrator in:

• An arbitration between three Middle Eastern claimants and a Middle Eastern respondent arising out of a joint venture for the rehabilitation of a port. The law of the Respondent’s State applies.
• An ICSID arbitration between Asia-Pacific investors and the Democratic Republic of Congo arising in relation to a mining project in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
• An arbitration between a Middle Eastern State and a major international oil company arising in connection with taxation issues associated with upstream activities. International law and the law of the State apply.
• An arbitration between a U.K. company and a Central Asian State arising in connection with an alleged investment in the electricity generation sector. International law and the law of the Central Asian State apply.
• An arbitration between a U.K. company and a Central Asian State arising from the performance of a services agreement. The law of the Central Asian State applies.
• An arbitration between a Sub-Saharan African State and an international contractor arising in respect of the construction of a national infrastructure project. The law of the Respondent State applies.
• An arbitration between two Middle Eastern parties arising in connection with the performance and termination of a joint venture agreement relating to a major real estate development project in the Middle East. Emirati law applied.
• An arbitration between a European company and a Middle Eastern company arising in connection with the construction of a power generation plant. Egyptian law applied.
• An arbitration (consolidating two separate arbitrations) between a Chinese multinational and an Egyptian distributor arising in connection with the performance of a distribution agreement. Egyptian law applied.
• An arbitration between a Middle Eastern State-owned entity and an international oil and gas company arising in connection with a long-term gas supply agreement. The law of the Middle Eastern State applied.
• An arbitration between two Middle Eastern parties arising in connection with the performance of a sub-distribution agreement. Lebanese law applied.
• An arbitration between two Middle Eastern parties arising in connection with the performance of a construction contract. Egyptian law applied.
• An arbitration between a Middle Eastern party and an Indian party arising from the termination of a services agreement. Emirati law applied.
• An emergency arbitration between two African companies concerning a request for a freezing order in connection with the performance of a financing agreement. OHADA law applied.
• An arbitration between an African party and an African State arising in connection with the performance of an infrastructure construction project. The law of the African State applied.

Education

• Oxford University, Magister Juris (Weidenfeld Scholar)
• Université Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne, Masters (LL.M.) in Private International Law and International Business Law
• Université Paris II Panthéon-Assas, Masters (LL.M.) in Litigation, Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution
• Université Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne, Maîtrise (Bachelor of Law)
• Cairo University, Bachelor of Law

• “Mohamed Shelbaya holds a strong reputation for his impressive handling of complex international arbitrations and challenging global disputes. Shelbaya is proficient in leading technical and sector-specific cross-border arbitrations involving telecommunications, energy and natural resources, and oil and gas.” – Chambers Global 2025
• “Mohamed Shelbaya is an amazing lawyer who has strategic vision and is very dedicated to serving his clients.” – Chambers Global 2025
• “Mohamed Shelbaya is a truly impressive lawyer whose financial expertise is very strong.” – Chambers Global 2025
• “Mohamed Shelbaya is a superb lawyer; it is great working with him.” – Chambers Global 2025
• “Mohamed Shelbaya is frankly perfect. What we appreciate most about him is his patience and his great knowledge of Egyptian law and international investment law.” – Chambers Global 2025
• “Co-founding partner Mohamed Shelbaya handles a multitude of commercial and investment treaty cases in the energy and mining sectors. He maintains a very strong reputation in the legal community and has an excellent track record in Egypt-related disputes.” – Chambers Global 2025
• “He is always on time, acting speedily and providing a wide range of possible solutions for each and every problem.” – Chambers Global 2025
• “Mohamed leads arbitration matters with ease, providing legal advice and replying promptly to queries. He has technical skills and a good sense of commercial strategy.” – Chambers Global 2025
• “He protects his clients from future or unforeseen disputes.” – Chambers Global 2025
• “We appreciate his patience and his great knowledge of international investment law.” – Chambers Global 2025
• “Mohamed is very professional and knowledgeable in international arbitration. He is helpful in the strategy and preparation for cases.” – Chambers Global 2025
• Ranked in the “Leading Individuals” category. – Legal 500 EMEA (France) 2025
• “Mohamed Shelbaya, in our view, is one of the best lawyers globally in oil and gas dispute resolution. He is extremely smart, sophisticated and commercial.” – Chambers Global 2024
• “Mohamed Shelbaya holds a strong reputation for his impressive handling of complex international arbitrations. Shelbaya is proficient in leading technical and sector-specific cross-border arbitrations involving telecommunications, energy and natural resources, and oil and gas.” – Chambers Global 2024
• “It is a great pleasure to work with Mohamed. He is brilliantly skilful at what he does, is very conscious of the client and handles complex matters with ease.” – Chambers Global 2024
• “Mohamed is very sophisticated but at the same time understands the commercial part of the business.” – Chambers Global 2024
• “Co-founding partner Mohamed Shelbaya handles a multitude of commercial and investment treaty cases in the energy and mining sectors. He maintains a very strong reputation in the legal community and has an excellent track record in Egypt-related disputes.” – Chambers Global 2024
• “He is always keen to help, is always reachable and has good insights into commercial matters from a legal perspective.” – Chambers Global 2024
• “Mohamed Shelbaya is developing a strong reputation for his impressive handling of complex international arbitrations. Based in Paris, his expertise is centered on investment treaty arbitrations related to Egypt and the Middle East. ‘He is wonderful. I was really impressed by him.’” – Chambers Global 2023
• “Paris-based Mohamed Shelbaya handles a wide range of commercial and investment cases in the energy and mining sectors. ‘He is a very prominent figure.’” – Chambers Global 2022
• Ranked in the “Leading Individuals” category. – Legal 500 EMEA (France) 2022
• “Mohamed Shelbaya is ’quickly rising to the top‘, garnering praise as ’a real highlight in the field of international arbitration.’” – Who’s Who Legal: Arbitration 2022
• “Based in Paris, Mohamed Shelbaya is seen as a ‘leading figure in arbitration, with strong ties to Egypt.’ He is equally experienced in commercial and investment treaty arbitrations, and regularly handles cases in the energy and petrochemical industries. Interviewees describe him as ‘among the best.’ One source elaborated that ‘having Mohamed at the top makes Shearman very attractive to state agencies in complex disputes.’” – Chambers Global 2020
• “Mohamed Shelbaya, based in the Paris office, is noted as ‘a big name in Egyptian disputes work,’ with one source going so far as to say: ‘He’s the best in his generation.’ Heavily involved in Egyptian investment treaty disputes, Shelbaya is also described as ‘an excellent practitioner’ who is ‘doing amazing work.’” – Chambers Global 2019
• “Mohamed Shelbaya is an ‘outstanding strategist with great tactical sense’ who can follow complex cases and offer practical solutions.” – GAR 100, 2019
• “Mohamed Shelbaya ‘has the ability to turn prima facie losing points into winning arguments. He is quick and very professional.’” – Who’s Who Legal: Arbitration 2018
• “Mohamed Shelbaya is praised as ‘one of the greatest arbitration minds of his generation’ and wins plaudits from sources as being ‘a calm, composed and efficient practitioner.’” – Who’s Who Legal: France 2018
• “The ‘persuasive and very smart’ Mohamed Shelbaya is ‘an outstanding strategist, who thinks outside the box and is focused on getting the deal done.’” – The Legal 500 EMEA 2015
• “A brilliant lawyer, who understands how each case involves different interests, priorities, concerns and goals and has a pragmatic approach, perfectly balancing legal and commercial considerations,” and “an outstanding strategist, with excellent analytical skills and a unique ability to come up with innovative solutions to solve difficult problems.” – GAR Article, “Three new counsel”, 9 July 2014

Languages

• English
• Arabic
• French

Nationalities

• Egyptian
• French

• Lecturer on investment arbitration, Sciences Po Law School
• Member, LCIA Court (2019–2024)
• President, LCIA Arab Users’ Council (2019–)
• Member, CRCICA Advisory Committee (2024–)
• Member, ITA Advisory Board
• Member, MENA Business Law Advisory Group, OECD
• Member, International Council for Commercial Arbitration (ICCA)
• Member, International Arbitration Institute (IAI)
• Member, ICC Arab Arbitration Group
• Member, ASA Below 40

• “Security Exceptions” (forthcoming in ICSID Review – Foreign Investment Law Journal)
• Chronique de la jurisprudence CIRDI, Journal du Droit International (Clunet), 2021–
• The Applicability of Non-National Rules to International Contracts (Oxford University, 2008)
• The Distinction Between Direct and Indirect Application of Foreign Mandatory Rules of Conduct (Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris I), 2007)
• The Influence of the Will of the Parties on the Scope of Application of Arbitration Agreements (Université Panthéon-Assas (Paris II), 2007)

• “International arbitration between legal cross-pollination and legal acculturation,” Paris Arbitration Week, 9 April 2025
• “Conditions precedent to the right to arbitrate in the context of investment disputes,” 6th Annual AlexU-CRICA Arbitration Conference, Cairo, 13 March 2025
• “Going beyond the surface: understanding the true stakes of shareholder disputes,” GAR Live Riyadh, 24 February 2025
• “A conversation across the Mediterranean – The role of State courts in supporting international arbitration,” 2024 Gaillard Lecture, Cairo, 29 December 2024 (Moderator)
• “Unilateral sanctions and international arbitration,” Qatar International Center for Conciliation and Arbitration’s Fifth World Conference on International Arbitration, Doha, 20 November 2024
• “Market trends and global developments in international arbitration,” LCIA Symposium: Insights from the Institution, Riyadh, 10 November 2024
• “New Investment Treaty Models,” Center for International Legal Studies (CILS) Salzburg Arbitration Symposium, Salzburg, 6 June 2024
• “After the Deal, the Ordeal: Trends and Insight into Post M&A Arbitration,” 1st ICC Egypt Arbitration Day, Cairo, 15 May 2024 (Moderator)
• “Expert Determination and Accelerated Dispute Resolution,” 2nd ITA Conference on International Arbitration in the Mining Sector, Toronto, 7 March 2024
• “Ethical Conduct of Counsel and Arbitrators in Arbitration,” IAC Eurasia Arbitration Week 2024, Astana, Kazakhstan, 5 March 2024
• “The idiosyncratic nature of the application of the fair and equitable and full and protection and security standards in the context of geopolitical disputes or disputes involving political unrest,” 1st Sciences Po MENA Arbitration Forum, Paris, 30 November 2023
• “The status quo of energy disputes in Africa,” GAR Live Africa, Nairobi, 29 November 2023
• Keynote speech, ICC YAF: “At the crossroads between East and West: Dealing with sanctions in Middle Eastern-seated arbitrations,” Dubai, 15 November 2023
• Introductory speech, LCIA Meet and Mingle with the President of the LCIA Arab Users’ Council and the LCIA Deputy Director General, Dubai, 13 November 2023
• “Arbitration endangered – What needs to be changed for arbitration to remain the preferred method for resolving international disputes,” IBA Arb 40 Symposium, Paris, 29 October 2023 (Moderator)
• “The investment treaty protection system in Africa: challenges and evolutions,” 4th Annual African Arbitration Association (AfAA) Conference, Cape Town, 14 October 2023 (Panellist)
• Keynote speech, “The international arbitration system: recent challenges and possible solutions,” Third ICC Kuwait Arbitration Day, Kuwait, 5 October 2023
• “Recent trends in investment treaty practice in Africa,” African Arbitration Association (AfAA) webinar, 28 September 2023
• “Unilateral sanctions: Legal Impossibility or Overriding Mandatory Rules,” Colloquium for the 150th anniversary of the Institute of International Law (IIL) / Institut de Droit International (IDI), Angers, France, 29 August 2023
• “Good faith: additional obligations and mandatory rules,” ADGM Conference – Civil Law Concepts in Focus: A Colloquium on Good Faith and Contract Interpretation in MENA and beyond, 11 May 2023
• “State Defenses to Investment Claims in Armed Conflict Contexts,” ICSID / ADGM Joint Conference: Investment Protection and Armed Conflict, Abu Dhabi, 10 May 2023
• “The impact of the Ukrainian crisis on arbitration in the UAE,” 2022 LCIA Arab Users’ Council – Arbitration in the current environment, Abu Dhabi, 3 October 2022
• “The impact of the Russian invasion of Ukraine – a case study in mitigating risk through prudent contract drafting,” CILS, Salzburg, 2 June 2022
• “Legal tools for accounting for uncertainty,” ASA, Prague, 24 May 2022
• “International arbitration between legal cross-pollination and legal acculturation,” Harvard Law School, 31 March–April 2022
• “In-crisis management and arbitration in the MENA region: financial and legal considerations,” LCIA Arab Users’ Council Symposium, Beirut, 25 January 2018
• “Using and abusing the boundary between commercial and investment arbitration,” UNCITRAL 50th Anniversary Conference (hosted by CRCICA), Cairo, 9–10 December 2017
• “Treaty and case law solutions to the problems arising from multiple proceedings,” LCIA European Users Council Symposium, Tylney Hall, 17–19 September 2017
• “The Do-Over: Gas Price Review Arbitration — What We Have Learned,” ICDR Conference, Looking Ahead: Effectively Arbitrating Complex Disputes in the Global Energy Sector, Houston, 20 April 2017
• “Rationalizing Investment Protection,” AILA Conference, A Paradigm Shift in International Investment Law, Cairo, 2 April 2017
• “The Principle of non-interference of State courts in arbitration under the French and Emirati arbitration law,” 1st Annual French-UAE International Arbitration Conference, Paris, 28 March 2017
• “Le recours en interprétation devant le CIRDI,” Un demi-siècle africain au CIRDI – Regards rétrospectifs et prospectifs, Paris, 27 March 2017
• “The One Thousand Faces of Double Recovery,” Columbia Law School Arbitration Day, New York, 3 March 2017
• “The Application of the New York Convention in France, Egypt and Jordan – Four Practical Scenarios,” UNCITRAL, Third International Conference for a Euro-Mediterranean Community of International Arbitration, Milan, 18 January 2017
• “Manifest Disregard of the Law: a breach of the arbitrator’s ethical duty?,” ICC YAF Conference, Ethics and antics – How Can We Hold Counsel and Arbitrators to Account?, Cairo, 4 December 2016
• “The Anatomy of Price Review Clauses and the Disputes to which they Lead,” LCIA Symposium on Gas Pricing Related Disputes, Cairo, 10 October 2016
• “Dual Nationality of Individuals,” ICSID-CRCICA Joint Conference – Key Issues in International Investment Arbitration, Cairo, 28 September 2016
• “The Impact of the Current TTIP Negotiations on the Investment Policies between EU and MENA Countries,” UNCITRAL, Second International Conference for a Euro-Mediterranean Community of International Arbitration, Cairo, 12 November 2015