Robert L. Sills

International Arbitration

Bob has represented clients in international arbitration matters including:

• Originated and won an international arbitration regarding a joint venture, obtaining an $87 million award plus 4.25% interest for an international client. This award has been confirmed in the United States and Cayman Islands. The arbitration tribunal also awarded the client a $2.2 million fee award, plus 4.25% interest.
• A construction dispute arising from the construction of the Doha International Airport, on behalf of one of the largest MEC subcontractors on the project.
• Representation of a major biotechnology firm in an ICC arbitration over a patent license agreement and the validity of the licensed patent.
• A major European telecommunications concern in two UNCITRAL arbitrations in Geneva under the shareholders agreement for the second-largest mobile telecommunications carrier in Russia. In related litigation in federal court, Bob obtained an anti-suit injunction halting Ukrainian litigation interfering with the arbitration, a judgment confirming the award, and two separate orders of contempt against the client’s counterparty and its corporate parents for violation of that judgment.
• An UNCITRAL proceeding in London to determine the rights of the parties under the shareholders agreement of an Amsterdam-based telecommunications company operating throughout the former Soviet Union.
• A European investor in a purchase price dispute over the sale of a telecommunications concern in Eastern Europe, in an UNCITRAL case seated in New York.
• A U.S.-based oil and gas company in an UNCITRAL proceeding against its Russian joint venture partner in an offshore project in the Russian Arctic.
• Italy’s largest telecommunications provider, for damages against the Republic of Bolivia for expropriating the country’s largest mobile carrier, in a matter before the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).
• A U.S. private equity fund in a dispute with its Indian partner in an Indian securities business, before the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR).
• A Japanese energy company in a dispute with its European partners over their rights in two Polish wind farms, before the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA).
• A Japanese investor in a U.S. generating facility, in an ICDR arbitration seated in New York.
• A Singapore franchisor in a dispute with its Mexican and Brazilian franchisees, before the ICDR.
• A U.S. investor in ad hoc proceeding against the Commonwealth of Dominica arising out of the expropriation of the local electric utility.
• A BIT claim on behalf of a telecommunications investor against the Russian state.
• An Asian country in a government-to-government dispute under a bilateral trade agreement.
• An Asian manufacturer of consumer electronics in a dispute over a license agreement and the validity of the license of intellectual property, before the International Chamber of Commerce.
• A forest products company in a “take or pay” dispute with one of its large customers before the ICC.
• A U.S. investor in a dispute with its European partner over their rights in a chain of Russian automobile distributorships, before the LCIA.
• A U.S. chemical manufacturer in a dispute with its Chinese licensee, before the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce.
• A U.S. lessor of several power plants in a dispute with its German lessee over damages to the leased facilities from the use of substandard fuel, in an ad hoc proceeding.
• A European construction company in a multiparty dispute over the construction and operation of a Brazilian petrochemical plant, before the ICC.
• A European consulting company in a dispute arising under a contract for software and networking services, before the ICDR.
• A Chinese textile manufacturer in a dispute with its U.S. distributor, before JAMS.
• A senior U.S. executive in a dispute over his “golden parachute” contract with the foreign acquirer of the business with which he was formerly associated, before the ICDR.
• A U.S. manufacturer in a royalties dispute with a Chinese government-owned corporation, before the ICC.
• Represented a Canadian manufacturer in SIAC arbitration involving a dispute with the selling shareholders of an Indian manufacturing company. Obtained anti-suit injunction from SIAC emergency arbitrator halting threatened Indian litigation and regulatory proceedings.
• Represented a major Japanese semiconductor company in ICC arbitration in Tokyo involving licensing and patent validity issues.
• Represented a major European integrated oil company in a dispute under the PSA for an Indonesian gas field.

Transnational Litigation

Bob has represented clients in transnational litigation matters including:

• A Brazilian bank in a dispute with a U.S. investment bank over fees allegedly owed for construction of a soybean mill in Paraguay, involving litigation in federal court in Florida as well as in Brazil.
• A Brazilian bank, in litigation over a transnational fraud involving false purchase orders and other forged documents issued by a U.S. manufacturer and used to obtain substantial loans from a Brazilian bank.
• A German bank in connection with an investigation of its securities trading practices in New York and London, and related civil litigation in federal court in New York.
• A Japanese manufacturer in connection with termination of its distributors in Puerto Rico, involving litigation with one distributor in Puerto Rico and arbitration with another, as well as a related arbitration in Japan.
• A French bank, in proceedings to recover erroneous payments to a Russian bank, involving litigation in New York and Russia.
• A Brazilian bank, in a dispute over its obligation to pay a Chinese exporter under letters of credit, involving litigation in New York and Brazil.
• An English trading company over payment for a shipment of Uzbek cotton, involving successful enforcement proceedings in England and New York, despite a proceeding in Bangladesh enjoining payment.
• Several foreign banks in a wide variety of matters, including disputes over letters of credit, liability for improper payments to various parties, claims of aiding and abetting allegedly unlawful transactions, investigations of trading activities, and alleged violations of United States laws restricting banks from engaging in transactions with certain countries.

Other

Bob has represented a number of well-known private equity funds in a wide variety of litigated and arbitrated matters, including:

• A successful effort to enjoin a competing bid by management of a target company;
• An action to rescind the purchase of a portfolio company that had misrepresented its financial condition, which resulted in the repurchase of the company by its selling shareholders;
• An action claiming that insufficient assets for a portfolio company’s pension plan were transferred in connection with a sale, which was resolved after trial without any net cost to the fund;
• Disputes with limited partners and lenders;
• Dissenting shareholders proceedings;
• Numerous disputes over earn-outs and indemnities; and
• General representation of the funds’ portfolio companies.

• Member, Association of the Bar of the City of New York, Committee on International Commercial Disputes
• Director, New York International Arbitration Center