In 2025, ICSID registered 63 requests, marking the second-highest annual figure in the history of the Center. More than half of those disputes were based on bilateral investment treaties. Lawyers view that statistic as broadly consistent with prior practice, but they also draw attention to a new trend: investors are now relying more frequently on contracts concluded with states. In addition, African states were the predominant parties to the proceedings, and Russia ceased to be the leading state in Eastern Europe by the number of investment proceedings initiated against it. At the same time, the number of energy-related disputes decreased.
GENERAL STATISTICS
The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) has published its statistics for 2025. During the reporting period, the Centre’s Secretariat registered 63 new disputes. This was the second-highest figure in the history of ICSID. The record was set in 2021, when 66 cases were registered.
According to interviewed lawyers, the increase in the number of investment disputes is foreseeable. Against the backdrop of growing global tensions, legislators in various jurisdictions are amending foreign trade regulation, as a result of which investors incur losses and apply to ICSID seeking compensation. Although the system has been criticized and subjected to reform efforts, it remains the only effective means of protecting investors’ rights in disputes with foreign States. General statistics confirm it: in arbitrations brought against States, investors prevail more often, and claimants take this trend into account when deciding whether to commence proceedings.
Overall, throughout ICSID’s existence, a clear trend has emerged toward an increase in the number of initiated proceedings. This is attributable to economic globalization and the growing number of geopolitical flashpoints, point out experts. At the same time the Center ensures an independent resolution of disputes and a predictable framework of legal protection, which is why investors continue to refer disputes to the Centre.
Every second dispute was initiated by claimants on the basis of bilateral investment treaties (BITs): such proceedings accounted for 58% of all cases registered. BITs are universally applicable to all investors from a contracting State and contain open arbitration clauses. Where a State party to a BIT violates the rights of an investor from another State that is likewise a party to that BIT, the investor may invoke the arbitration clause and commence arbitration.
Proceedings based on contracts concluded between a State and an investor accounted for 15% of the total number of cases. Such contracts create rights and obligations only for the specific parties within the framework of a particular legal relationship, and therefore give rise to fewer disputes. At the same time, experts recall that previously the number of such cases has been even lower, however, since 2023, the Centre has recorded growth in this category. Lawyers assume, this may indicate that States are seeking to provide more targeted protection to investors making investments in specific strategically important projects, rather than extending the full scope of protection to all foreign investments.
According to the statistics, a further 6% of cases were based on domestic investment legislation, while another 5% were based on the Energy Charter Treaty.
GEOGRAPHY OF THE PARTIES AND SUBJECT MATTER OF THE DISPUTES
In nearly one out of every four disputes, a State from Sub-Saharan Africa was a party to the proceedings. The Centre registered 15 such requests, accounting for 24% of the total number of disputes. South American States ranked second, accounting for 13 cases, or 20% of the total caseload. These regions occupied leading positions for a reason: those States are characterized by the highest degree of economic and political instability, which result in investor losses and, consequently, arbitration proceedings.
At the same time, the number of claims brought against Eastern European States has declined: in 2024, such disputes accounted for 24%, whereas in 2025 they represented only 19%. Experts explain this dynamic by reference to the fact that, on 5 May 2020, the Member States of the European Union signed an agreement terminating a number of intra-EU bilateral investment treaties. In addition, certain States also withdrew their consent to participation in the Energy Charter Treaty, which had previously been used on a regular basis as a basis for commencing arbitrations.
Another shift has happened in Eastern Europe: Russia is no longer the leading State by the number of investment proceedings initiated against it, and Ukraine has moved into first place by that metric.
Investors from Western Europe applied to ICSID most frequently: they accounted for 44% of the total claimants. A further 14% of claimants were from the United States, Canada, and Mexico. One in every ten investors originated from South Asia, East Asia, and the Pacific region.
Most of the cases registered in 2025 concerned the oil and gas and mining industries, which together accounted for 45%. In 2024, those sectors likewise dominated ICSID statistics, although their share then stood at 38%.
A further 16% of disputes arose in the construction sector. The increase in comparison with 2024 can be explained by reference to the development of strategic infrastructure projects and rising investment levels in South American and African States: substantial capital expenditures are associated specifically with infrastructure improvement.
By contrast, the volume of energy disputes declined significantly during the reporting period — 6% as compared with 24% in 2024. Experts recall that, between 2013 and 2020, there was a surge in disputes relating to renewable energy. This was linked to changes in the regulation of that sector in the European Union during the 2010s. More recently, however, the regulatory framework in this field has not been changing as radically, and accordingly fewer disputes are being brought.
OUTCOME OF PROCEEDINGS AND APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATORS
In 2025, parties settled amicably 33% of cases, while all remaining disputes were concluded by an award rendered by the tribunal (67%). At the same time, arbitral tribunals granted claims in full or in part in every second dispute (53%). In 31% of cases, the tribunal dismissed the claim, and in a further 11% it declined jurisdiction.
ICSID appointed the largest number of arbitrators from Canada, France, and the United States—14 from each State. A further 10 appointees were from Switzerland, while only one arbitrator appointed by the Centre in the past year was from Russia.
