Two Top Courts, One Message: Sovereign Immunity Won't Block Your Award
Two of the world's highest courts moved in the same direction this year on one of investment arbitration's hardest questions. In March 2026, the UK Supreme Court held in Kingdom of Spain v Infrastructure Services Luxembourg and Republic of Zimbabwe v Border Timbers that sovereign immunity is no defence to the registration of ICSID awards in England and Wales — Article 54 of the ICSID Convention, the Court held, is itself a clear and unequivocal waiver. Then, on 29 June 2026, the US Supreme Court denied certiorari in Kingdom of Spain v Blasket Renewable Investments, leaving intact D.C. Circuit rulings that had already rejected sovereign immunity defences raised by both Spain and Russia.
Not every court is moving the same way — in April 2026 Australia's High Court went the other direction, holding in CCDM Holdings v Republic of India that ratifying the New York Convention does not itself waive immunity. That split is exactly the kind of jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction variation that makes enforcement strategy a specialist exercise: where you enforce can matter as much as what you've won.
Enforcement of Investment Treaty Arbitration Awards, now in its third edition from Globe Law and Business under general editor Julien Fouret of Holman Fenwick Willan, is built for exactly this landscape. With roughly 70 contributors and coverage now extending past 30 jurisdictions — including four new country chapters added this edition — it lets practitioners assess, jurisdiction by jurisdiction, where a state's assets are actually reachable before committing resources to an enforcement action. It also addresses the enforcement consequences of the EU's denunciation of intra-EU BITs and the specific issues raised by enforcing awards against Russia.
An award is only worth what can be collected. With the UK and US courts moving to close off immunity defences and Australia holding the line, knowing exactly where that principle applies — and where it doesn't — is the difference between a paper win and a recovery.
Q&A
What did the UK Supreme Court decide in March 2026?
In Spain v Infrastructure Services Luxembourg and Zimbabwe v Border Timbers, it held that Article 54 of the ICSID Convention is a clear waiver of sovereign immunity, so immunity is no defence to registering an ICSID award in England and Wales.
What did the US Supreme Court do in June 2026?
It denied certiorari in Spain v Blasket Renewable Investments, leaving in place D.C. Circuit rulings rejecting sovereign immunity defences raised by Spain and Russia.
Do all courts agree on this question?
No — Australia's High Court held in April 2026 that ratifying the New York Convention does not itself waive sovereign immunity, underlining why enforcement strategy has to be assessed jurisdiction by jurisdiction.
How many jurisdictions does the third edition cover?
Over 30, with new country chapters added on Austria, Japan, Poland and Saudi Arabia.
Where can I buy Enforcement of Investment Treaty Arbitration Awards, 3rd ed?
Directly from CLNZ Books at clnzbooks.com, with worldwide shipping and secure payment by credit card or PayPal.