Case: Dispute in international artbitration ICC — force majeure, contract termination, and refund of the advance under English law

08.09.2025

A Belarusian company (the buyer) operating in the entertainment and digital content industry approached REVERA with a request to assist in a dispute with a large European supplier. The supplier is part of a major group of companies that provides exclusive products and content worldwide, whose shares are traded on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE).

The dispute arose from a supply agreement and commercial license for IP products signed in 2021 (the contract). Until February 2022, the contract was partially fulfilled: part of the goods worth 1.5 million euros was delivered and paid for, the license was granted, and an advance payment of approximately 1 million euros was received for future deliveries. Following events in February 2022, the supplier declared that the contract had been terminated, with reference to a force majeure clause and sanctions imposed by the EU (including EU Regulation 2022/355), the UK, the US, and Canada, but refused to return the advance payment to the buyer.

According to the contract, disputes were to be resolved through ICC arbitration in London (standard clause), with English law as the governing law.
REVERA’s team was requested to represent the client in the ICC arbitration: by claiming a refund of the advance payment, asking for a purchase of part of the supplied goods, and managing the debt collection process amid sanction-related restrictions.

SOLUTION

REVERA initiated arbitration proceedings in ICC, engaging local lawyers and experts when needed. We successfully navigated all procedural and organizational challenges related to the sanction regime (including payment of arbitration costs from Belarus to France and payment for local legal services).
Furthermore, during the proceedings, the supplier filed counterclaims exceeding 5 million euros (bringing the total dispute value to around 8 million euros). 
This complicated ICC’s decision regarding the arbitration costs and their allocation between parties. While the costs are generally split 50/50, we proved that the supplier deliberately inflated its claims beyond the buyer’s claims to artificially increase arbitration costs.

RESULT

After a year of active proceedings, including three rounds of exchanging positions, document production, and online hearings, all claims of our client were fully satisfied. 
The supplier’s counterclaims were entirely dismissed.
The procedural issues, including the allocation of arbitration costs and compensation for legal fees, were also resolved in favor of our client.

INSIGHTS

Before initiating arbitration, it is crucial to estimate potential costs, balance it with the benefit, and plan procedural strategy in advance. Arbitration institutions such as ICC, SCC, and LCIA provide a very flexible cost structure and procedure.

It is advisable to evaluate not only the legal aspects but also external factors such as sanctions, parties’ motivations, negotiation possibilities, and the structure of the debtor’s corporate group. 

For instance, if a small company has a dispute with a large IT corporation, a ‘war of attrition’ strategy is not a best choice. It is possible to achieve a 100% victory but only with a carefully planned approach.

If you face a dispute in international arbitration, entrust the legal job to REVERA.
The REVERA Arbitration team (Kamal Tserakhau, Aliaksandr Struzhko) — our experts in international commercial arbitration.

Authors: Aliaksandr Struzhko.