On 17 December 2015, the Paris Court of Appeal issued three almost identical judgments (see Court of Appeal of Paris, 17 December 2015, n°15/11665, n°15/11667 and n°15/11669) declining to grant Russia a stay of enforcement pending the outcome of Russia's appeals against orders granting enforcement of the US$50 billion Yukos awards made against it. However, the court did order that all monies seized in France be placed in escrow during such time. This means that while the former majority shareholders of Yukos oil company can continue to attach Russia's assets in France, they will not be able to benefit immediately from such seizures. The decision on Russia's appeal against the orders granting enforcement of the awards in France is expected in late 2016. We will provide further analysis on this decision shortly.

It has been reported that on 17 December 2015, a tribunal at the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) issued its award on jurisdiction and admissibility in Philip Morris Asia Limited (Hong Kong) v The Commonwealth of Australia. The tribunal decided it did not have jurisdiction to hear Philip Morris Asia's (PMA) challenge to Australia's Tobacco Plain Packaging Act 2011. PMA had brought its claim against Australia under the Hong-Kong-Australia bilateral investment treaty (BIT) and the arbitration was seated in Singapore and conducted under the UNCITRAL Rules 2010. PMA argued that the legislation expropriated its investment and that it was not accorded fair and equitable treatment. Australia raised three procedural objections. Two of these were heard in an initial phase as a result of the tribunal's decision to grant Australia's request to bifurcate the proceedings. The tribunal's award will be published on the PCA website once it complies with the confidentiality obligations.

The tribunal has issued its final award in Hrvatska Elektroprivreda D.D. v Republic of Slovenia (ICSID Case No. ARB/05/24), finding that Slovenia had breached an agreement entered into between Croatia and Slovenia regarding the settlement of disputes arising from the operation of a power plant in Slovenia. The tribunal awarded the Croatian claimant EUR19,987,00 in damages plus legal costs in the amount of US$10 million (some 3.3 million less than the claimant's actual legal costs) and interest compounded semiannually from the date of the award. However, the tribunal held that the fees of the tribunal appointed expert were to be borne equally between the parties since his appointment was due to the failure of the parties' experts to provide any clear and convincing damages case.

According to the Australian Centre for International Commercial Arbitration (ACICA), the revised ACICA Arbitration Rules and Expedited Arbitration Rules will enter into force on 1 January 2016.