LITHUANIA Law and Practice Contributed by: Kęstutis Švirinas, Ieva Rimavičienė, Domantė Lunytė and Luka Tamulionytė, Sorainen
8. Damages and Valuation 8.1 Remedies
efforts be made to resolve the dispute amicably. If no settlement is reached within six months, the investor may submit the dispute either to the domestic courts of the host state or to international arbitration, includ- ing ICSID or UNCITRAL arbitration. Thus, while Lithuanian law does not impose general pre-arbitration requirements, such obligations may arise under international instruments or party agree- ments and must be carefully reviewed in each case. 7.2 Confidentiality and Transparency While investment arbitration generally adheres to the principle of confidentiality, increasing demands for transparency – particularly where public interests are involved – have led to evolving practices in Lithuania. In cases involving the state, certain information is rou- tinely disclosed to the public to ensure accountability without compromising the integrity of the proceed- ings. For example, in the ongoing arbitration between Lithuania and Belaruskali, publicly accessible informa- tion includes the identity of the parties’ representa- tives, arbitrators, the nature and origin of the dispute, the amount of the dispute, procedural orders and offi- cial press releases. This level of disclosure strikes a balance between confidentiality and the public’s right to know. Similarly, in the high-profile Veolia case, which con- cluded in 2025 after nearly a decade of proceedings, the fact of the concluded settlement agreement, its key financial terms and the nature of the dispute were made public. The Lithuanian government also dis- closed how the settlement funds would be allocated, further reinforcing transparency and public trust. These examples illustrate how parties and institutions in Lithuania are navigating the tension between con- fidentiality and transparency in investor–state arbitra- tion, particularly where public resources and interests are at stake.
Under Lithuanian law, the remedies available in arbi - tration are generally limited to those permitted by the applicable substantive law. Where Lithuanian law governs the dispute, the arbitral tribunal is limited to awarding remedies recognised under that legal frame- work. As Lithuania follows the civil law tradition, cer- tain remedies – such as punitive damages – are not established or permitted under national law and there- fore cannot be awarded. The scope of available remedies is determined by the applicable substantive law, which defines the limits within which the arbitral tribunal may operate. 8.2 Methodologies for Quantum Assessment In Lithuania, the valuation of damages is governed by Order No. 1K-159 of 27 April 2012 of the Minister of Finance, “On the Approval of the Methodology for Asset and Business Valuation”. For the purposes of insurance and loss assessment, damages may typi- cally be quantified using the following methodologies: • market value, determined through an individual valuation; • replacement (reinstatement) value of the property, determined through an individual valuation; or • other valuation approaches prescribed by the Inter- national Valuation Standards, the European Valua- tion Standards or applicable legislation, determined through an individual valuation. Accordingly, all internationally recognised valuation methodologies, including discounted cash flow, mar- ket-based and cost-based approaches, are consid- ered permissible and feasible for quantifying damages in Lithuania. 8.3 Recovering Interest and Legal Costs Parties involved in arbitration proceedings are gener- ally entitled to recover interest, legal fees, expert fees, and costs associated with the arbitral institution. Under Article 48 of the Law on Commercial Arbitra- tion, arbitration costs may include:
167 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook