Andrei Yakovlev


London, United Kingdom

Dubai, United Arab Emirates

Described as a "top notch professional" by Legal 500 UK and named a Super Lawyer by Thomson Reuters, Andrei is a New York, English and Russian qualified international arbitration partner with over 25 years of experience.  

He handles complex, high value cases arising out of foreign investment, sovereign and corporate finance, M&A/joint ventures, major projects and fraud, in a variety of sectors including financial services, energy, metals and mining, communications and technology and real estate development.  

His practice covers both investor-state and commercial arbitration.  He has advised and represented clients in arbitrations under ICSID, ICSID Additional Facility, ICC, SCC, LCIA and UNCITRAL rules, as well as in national courts in relation to international arbitration matters.

He acts largely for sovereign states, central banks, large corporates and ultra-high net worth individuals.  

Andrei's representations have included, among others, an energy arbitration ranked by AmLaw Arbitration Scorecard among 10 largest contract arbitration worldwide, and a multilateral investment treaty interpretation case named by Global Arbitration Review among "10 most important decisions" of the year globally.  His representative matters include acting for:

  • People's Republic of China in ICSID proceedings in respect of a claim by a Japanese investor, Macro Trading Co. Ltd, under the China-Japan BIT, in relation to an alleged expropriation of a large-scale property development project in China; (Case pending);

  • Nafrogaz Ukrayiny, national petroleum company of Ukraine in a dispute with companies controlled by Ukrainian oligarch Ihor Kolomoyski, in relation to control over Ukrnafta (Ukraine's largest petroleum production company) and mutual claims and counterclaims concerning mismanagement and scheme of fraud at Ukrnafta for the aggregate amount of US $8 bln; (Case pending);

  • Ukraine in a trio of arbitration proceedings under the ICSID, SCC and UNCITRAL rules relating to a series of investment arbitration claims brought by UK-based JKX Oil & Gas Plc and its subsidiaries for the aggregate amount of US $270mln in connection with Ukraine increasing taxes for hydrocarbon production from 5% to 65%, imposing gas market restrictions and restrictions on dividend repatriation.  Tribunal dismissed over 97% of claims. 

  • Ukraine in ICSID arbitration proceedings in relation to a US $138 mln claim made by a British property investor relating to an alleged expropriation of a significant real estate project in Ukraine's capital Kiev.  (All claims dismissed);

  • Kyrgyz Republic in a trio of UNCITRAL proceedings relating to nationalization of Kyrgyzstan's largest bank, AsiaUniversalBank, with investor claims ranging between US $17 mln and US $500 mln. (All proceedings terminated with over US $2.5 mln costs ordered against investors).  

  • Kyrgyz Republic in UNCITRAL proceedings in relation to a US $311 mln claim by Canadian miner Stans Energy Corp, relating to an alleged expropriation of its rights to the world's fifth largest rare earth metals mine.  (Over 95% of Stans Energy's claims were dismissed);

  • A Russian oligarch in a US $1 bln dispute with another Russian oligarch involving BVI litigation and a series of ICC and UNCITRAL proceedings concerning exercise of a put option in a joint venture in the Russian energy sector, claims of fraud and unlawful means conspiracy (case pending); 

  • A respondent in LCIA proceedings among Russian and Ukrainian oligarchs: Pinchuk v Kolomoyski, Bogolyubov and Spektor in a dispute arising out of a US $2 billion international ferromanganese consortium with mining assets across the CIS, Africa and Australia (Case settled);

  • Hellenic Telecommunications Organisation, Greece's biggest telecommunications company and its operating subsidiary in parallel ICC and LCIA arbitration proceedings against the Government of Armenia in relation to a US $500 mln dispute involving claims of expropriation of fixed and mobile telecommunications concessions, breaches of licence terms, and breaches of investment protection obligations (Case settled);

  • Polski Koncern Naftowy Orlen S.A., Poland's largest oil refinery, against Russian oil major Yukos in UNCITRAL proceedings involving US $4.5 bln in claims and counterclaims, ranked by AmLaw Arbitration Scorecard 2008 among ten largest contract arbitrations worldwide at the time (Case settled); 

  • Kyrgyz Republic in connection with annulment in the French courts of a US $16 mln arbitral award made in favour of a Latvian investor Valeri Belokon for alleged expropriation of a commercial bank he owned in the Kyrgyz Republic.  Paris Court of Appeal held that the bank was established and functioned substantially as a machinery for money laundering, that the award was conferring on the investor proceeds of a criminal enterprise, and for this reason annulled the award on the grounds of violation of French international public policy.  French Supreme Court dismissed the investor's appeal.  

  • French banking group Credit Agricole Indosuz in a series of UNCITRAL proceedings relating to defaults by Russian banks in excess of US $500 mln on ISDA-based forward foreign exchange transactions following introduction by Russia of a moratorium on foreign payments at the height of the 1998 financial crisis.  (Client prevailed in all cases, with costs); 

  • China State Construction Company in a dispute with a Finnish developer, Stockmann Oyj Abp in SCC arbitration proceedings in connection with a construction contract for construction of a multi-purpose office and department store development, Stockmann Center Nevsky in St Petersburg, Russia (Case settled);

  • Kyrgyz Republic in UNCITRAL arbitration proceedings in relation to a US $120 mln claim by a major Kazakhstan bank BTA for alleged expropriation of BTA's banking subsidiary in Kyrgyz Republic (Case settled without admission of liability or any compensation payable by Kyrgyz Republic);

  • Kyrgyz Republic before the CIS Economic Court in a case on interpretation of the 1997 Moscow Convention for Protection of Investors' Rights (the judgement supported Kyrgyz Republic's interpretation, leading to setting aside of US $150 mln worth of investment arbitration awards against the Republic, with wider implications for investor-state disputes in the CIS; Global Arbitration Review named the judgment among "10 most important decisions of 2014");

  • A major Eastern European energy group in connection with a pricing dispute subject to LCIA arbitration arising out of a US $150 mln acquisition by the group of two powers stations and related infrastructure from a major U.S.-based power company (dispute settled); 

  • Kyrgyz Republic in UNCITRAL proceedings in Stockholm in relation to a US $200 mln claim by Canadian miner Centerra Gold Corp and its subsidiaries, relating to environmental damage claims arising out of Centerra's mining operations in the country; Case settled whereby investor withdrew its claims and agreed to pay tens of millions of US dollars to special purpose funds in the Kyrgyz Republic;

  • A global telecommunications company and its subsidiaries, against several global mobile telecommunications equipment suppliers, in ICC proceedings involving claims and counterclaims in excess of US $500 mln (case settled);

  • A Russian oligarch in ICC proceedings relating to a US $30 mln claim against him in respect of a series of fraudulent financial transactions (all claims dismissed, with all costs ordered against the claimant); 

  • A major Kazakhstan mining group in US $35 million ad-hoc arbitration under the UK Arbitration Act 1996 and related English High Court litigation in relation to an agreement between two Kazakhstan oligarchs concerning acquisition of metal processing assets (case settled); 

  • The National Bank of an African state in a dispute with several global companies relating to a series of disputed letters of credit (Case settled);

  • The Ministry of Finance of a Sub-Saharan state in connection with a default on sovereign debt and potential non-compliance with the IMF standby arrangement;  

  • Credit Agricole Indosuez group in proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights against the Russian Federation, in connection with a complaint alleging breaches of the right to protection of property, fair trial and effective remedy.  Case settled as part of an overall settlement with several banks;


  • S.J.D., Northwestern University School of Law (Chicago)

  • LL.M., Northwestern University School of Law (Chicago)

  • LL.M., Queen Mary, University of London

  • Dipl Jur, Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO, Moscow)