PERU Law and Practice Contributed by: Renzo Salvatore Monroy Pino, Roberto Shimabukuro Miyasato, Aníbal Urtecho Gómez and Alexander Montenegro, Monroy & Shima Abogados
1. Overview 1.1 National Position
1.4 Key Industries Mining Sector
Mining is the sector with the most investor–state arbi- tration activity in Peru. As one of the world’s leading producers of minerals such as copper, silver, zinc and gold, Peru has attracted significant foreign investment in this sector. Disputes frequently arise from regulatory changes, revocation of concessions, socio-environ- mental conflicts, and tax disputes. Energy and Hydrocarbons The energy sector, including hydrocarbons, electricity generation, and renewable energy, has also gener- ated significant arbitrations. Disputes typically involve changes in concession regimes, tariff modifications, and regulatory aspects. Infrastructure and Concessions The infrastructure sector, particularly airport, high- way and port concessions, has generated significant arbitral disputes. The emblematic case is Kuntur Wasi v Peru (2024), concerning the concession of the Chinchero International Airport in Cusco. This sec- tor is vulnerable to arbitrations owing to changes in government policy, unilateral contract terminations, and political pressures following questions from the Comptroller General or Congress. 1.5 Major Arbitrations The recent case of Lupaka Gold Corp v Republic of Peru (ICSID Case No ARB/20/46, Award of 30 June 2025) (“ Lupaka Gold ”) represents one of the most legally significant arbitrations against Peru, address- ing fundamental questions about state responsibility for the actions of rural communities and the scope of investor protection obligations. Key Facts Canadian investor Lupaka Gold acquired mining con- cessions in Peru’s Huaura Province in 2012. Despite obtaining necessary permits and reaching agreements with two rural communities (Lacsanga and Santo Domingo), the company faced escalating opposi- tion from a third community, Parán. In October 2018, Parán community members blockaded the access road to the mine. In March 2019, they physically seized control of the mine site and began exploiting it themselves. Despite repeated appeals from the inves-
Peru has traditionally maintained a favourable position towards investor–state arbitration as a dispute resolu- tion mechanism for investment disputes. This policy is reflected in its active participation in international investment treaties and its commitment to internation- al arbitration as a tool to attract foreign investment. The 1993 Political Constitution establishes funda- mental guarantees for foreign investment, including the principle of equal treatment between domestic and foreign investors. The Peruvian legal framework expressly recognises the validity of international arbi- tration in both commercial and investment matters. 1.2 Arbitration Conventions Peru has been a contracting state to the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (the “ICSID Convention”) since 1993. This accession has enabled numerous investment disputes to be resolved under the institutional framework of ICSID. Peru ratified the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 (the “New York Convention”) in 1988. This convention is fundamental for the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Peruvian territory. 1.3 Prevalence of Investor–State Arbitration Investor–state arbitration is a widely used mechanism by foreign investors in Peru, particularly in strategic sectors such as mining, energy, and infrastructure. Peru has been a party to multiple ICSID arbitrations and ad hoc proceedings under the UNCITRAL Arbitra- tion Rules. Foreign investors generally prefer international arbi- tration over Peruvian domestic jurisdiction for several reasons. Arbitration offers neutrality, technical special- isation of arbitrators, and the possibility of enforcing awards internationally under conventions such as the ICSID Convention and the New York Convention. The perception of greater predictability and lower risk of political interference also influences this preference.
181 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook