Niko v Bapex and Petrobangla (ICSID Case No. ARB/10/11)
- Forum
- ICSID 1
- Case number
- ARB/10/11 1
- Tribunal
- Michael E. Schneider (President), Jan Paulsson, Campbell McLachlan 1
- Decision on Liability
- 28 February 2020 1
- Award
- 18 December 2025 1
- Claim and award amounts
- Not stated on the ICSID case page 1
The case
The ICSID Secretary-General registered the request for arbitration on 27 May 2010 1. The tribunal was constituted on 20 December 2010 1. italaw lists Bapex and Petrobangla as respondents 2.
As reported by David Bergman of Netra News, the dispute arose from a Joint Venture Agreement of 2003 and a Gas Purchase and Sale Agreement between Niko and Bangladesh 4.
| Date | Step |
|---|---|
| 19 August 2013 | Decision on Jurisdiction 1 |
| 11 September 2014 | Decision on the Payment Claim 1 |
| 26 May 2016 | Third Decision on the Payment Claim 1 |
| 24 to 29 April 2017 | Hearing on the corruption claim in Paris 1 |
| 25 February 2019 | Decision on the Corruption Claim, published in redacted form 1,2 |
| 24 May 2019 | Procedural Order No. 23 on redactions and publication 1 |
| 28 February 2020 | Decision on Liability 1 |
| 18 May 2021 | Decision on Heads of Recoverable Loss 1 |
| 18 December 2025 | Award 1 |
The corruption allegation
Bapex and Petrobangla argued that both agreements were obtained through endemic corruption and so were voidable, as reported by Netra News 4.
Netra News reported that Canadian authorities accused Niko in 2011 of trying to bribe the then state minister AKM Mosharraf Hossain in 2005 with a luxury vehicle and a trip to Canada and the United States 4. It reported that Canadian prosecutors said they found no evidence the bribe affected the agreements 4.
What the tribunal decided
The tribunal issued its Decision on the Corruption Claim on 25 February 2019 2. As reported by Tom Jones of Global Arbitration Review on 2 August 2019, it declined to dismiss Niko's claim after finding there was no proof of corruption 3.
Netra News reported that the tribunal said the evidence does not establish that the agreements or governmental acts in their preparation were procured by corruption 4. It reported that the tribunal found no evidential support for allegations of bribes paid to the then prime minister, Khaleda Zia 4. It reported that the tribunal described the gas purchase agreement as manifestly favourable to Petrobangla 4.
The tribunal then issued a Decision on Liability on 28 February 2020 and its award on 18 December 2025 1. The ICSID case page does not state the award's findings or any amount, and lists no annulment proceeding 1.
Proceedings in Bangladesh
Netra News reported that a criminal case over the Niko deals was filed in 2007 against Khaleda Zia and nine others on corruption and bribery charges 4. It reported that the case was at the charge framing stage before the Dhaka Special Judge Court 4.
Law Minister Anisul Huq responded that the crime was committed in Bangladesh and that Khaleda Zia was being tried there, as reported by Netra News 4. The same report said tribunal officers stated that the Bangladesh government refused to let ICSID publish the ruling 4. The ICSID case page records that a redacted version was later the subject of a publication order 1.
Common questions
Did the ICSID tribunal find corruption in Niko v Bangladesh?
No. In its decision of 25 February 2019 it found corruption was not proved, as reported by Global Arbitration Review and Netra News 3,4.
What did Bapex and Petrobangla allege?
That the 2003 joint venture agreement and the gas purchase agreement were obtained through corruption and were voidable 4.
When was the Niko award issued?
The tribunal rendered its award on 18 December 2025 1.
Rules and fees change. Check the official site linked above before you apply or pay. Spotted an error? Email hello@arbitrationoutcomes.org with the official link.
Sources
- ICSID: case details, Niko Resources (Bangladesh) Ltd. v. Bapex and Petrobangla, ARB/10/11
- italaw: Decision on the Corruption Claim, Niko v. Bapex and Petrobangla (25 February 2019)
- Global Arbitration Review, Tom Jones: Decision on corruption claims in Bangladeshi gas case surfaces (2 August 2019)
- Netra News, David Bergman: Khaleda and BNP leaders exonerated by international arbitration tribunal (2020)
Related
- The corruption defence in arbitration
How states raise bribery against investor claims and awards, with what tribunals and courts decided in World Duty Free, Metal-Tech and Nigeria v P&ID.
- World Duty Free v Kenya (ICSID Case No. ARB/00/7)
ICSID award of 4 October 2006 that dismissed World Duty Free's claims against Kenya after finding a US$2 million payment to President Moi was a bribe.
- Metal-Tech v Uzbekistan (ICSID Case No. ARB/10/3)
ICSID award of 4 October 2013 that declined jurisdiction over Metal-Tech's claims against Uzbekistan after finding corruption.
- Investor-state arbitration explained
How foreign investors bring claims against states, where consent comes from, what law applies and how ICSID cases have ended, with official figures.