Foresight Fund Managers Ltd. v. Kingdom of Spain (D.D.C. Civil Actions Nos. 18-1148 and 20-925)

Procedural record

1. 28 September 2026United States

   28 September 2026United States

   Memorandum Opinion of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in Civil Action Nos. 18-1148 (TSC) and 20-925 (TSC) dated 28 September 2026

   United States District Court for the District of Columbia

   Case no.

   18-1148 (TSC) and 20-925 (TSC)

   Decision summary

   The court denied Spain’s motion to dismiss the consolidated petitions to confirm the Novenergia and Foresight arbitral awards. It held that the FSIA arbitration exception supplied subject-matter jurisdiction, that personal jurisdiction was present, and that the service challenge to the Foresight petition was moot.

   Participants

   Foresight Fund Managers Ltd.

   Kingdom of Spain

   United States District Court for the District of Columbia

   Judge

   Tanya S. Chutkan

   Authorities cited

   10

   • Energy Charter Treaty
     treaty
   • United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York Convention)
     treaty
   • Federal Arbitration Act
     statute
   • Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act
     statute
   • Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters (Hague Service Convention)
     treaty
   • Republic of Moldova v. Komstroy LLC (Case C-741/19, ECLI:EU:C:2021:655)
     case-law
   • NextEra Energy Global Holdings B.V. v. Kingdom of Spain (112 F.4th 1088 (D.C. Cir. 2024))
     case-law
   • Chevron Corp. v. Ecuador (795 F.3d 200 (D.C. Cir. 2015))
     case-law
   • LLC SPC Stileks v. Republic of Moldova (985 F.3d 871 (D.C. Cir. 2021))
     case-law
   • Zhongshan Fucheng Industrial Investment Co. LTD v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (112 F.4th 1054 (D.C. Cir. 2024))
     case-law
2. Date not availableArbitration

   Date not availableArbitration

   Foresight final arbitral award

   Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce

   Decision summary

   The tribunal awarded Foresight €39 million, plus costs and interest, after rejecting Spain’s jurisdictional objection.

   Participants

   Foresight Luxembourg Solar 1 S.À.R.L.

   Foresight Luxembourg Solar 2 S.À.R.L.

   GWM Renewable Energy I S.P.A.

   GWM Renewable Energy II S.P.A.

   Greentech Energy Systems

   Kingdom of Spain

   Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce

   Authorities cited

   1

   • Energy Charter Treaty
     treaty
3. Date not availableArbitration

   Date not availableArbitration

   Novenergia final arbitral award

   Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce

   Decision summary

   The tribunal awarded Novenergia €53.3 million, plus costs and interest, after rejecting Spain’s jurisdictional objection.

   Participants

   Novenergia II – Energy & Environment (SCA)

   Kingdom of Spain

   Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce

   Authorities cited

   1

   • Energy Charter Treaty
     treaty
4. Date not availableSweden

   Date not availableSweden

   Decision of the Supreme Court of Sweden in Novenergia II – Energy & Environment (SCA) v. Kingdom of Spain

   Supreme Court of Sweden

   Decision summary

   The Supreme Court of Sweden denied Novenergia’s request to review the Svea Court’s judgment.

5. Date not availableSweden

   Date not availableSweden

   Judgment of the Svea Court of Appeal in Kingdom of Spain v. Foresight Luxembourg Solar 1 S.À.R.L.

   Svea Court of Appeal

   Decision summary

   The Svea Court annulled the Foresight award under Section 33 of the Swedish Arbitration Act, relying in part on the Court of Justice of the European Union’s judgment in Komstroy.

6. Date not availableSweden

   Date not availableSweden

   Judgment of the Svea Court of Appeal in Kingdom of Spain v. Novenergia II – Energy & Environment (SCA)

   Svea Court of Appeal

   Decision summary

   The Svea Court invalidated the Novenergia award under Section 33 of the Swedish Arbitration Act, holding that an arbitration agreement could not have been created under Article 26 of the Energy Charter Treaty as interpreted in Komstroy.