The Chosun | 25 March 2026
South Korean government, Elliott restart ISDS arbitration
By Park Hye-yeon
The South Korean government and U.S.-based private equity firm Elliott have both abandoned appeals in the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) case. This means the dispute over whether the South Korean government should bear compensation responsibility will effectively restart from the beginning.
The Ministry of Justice announced on the 25th, “Neither the South Korean government nor Elliott filed an appeal in the lawsuit to cancel the arbitration award in the Elliott ISDS case, which South Korea won last month.” With both sides opting not to appeal, the case will return to arbitration proceedings.
This case originated from the 2015 merger between Samsung C&T and Cheil Industries. Elliott, a former shareholder of Samsung C&T, filed an ISDS in July 2018, claiming it suffered losses of $770 million (approximately 1.0118 trillion won) due to the South Korean government’s alleged unfair intervention in the merger by mobilizing the National Pension Service. The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), which handled the ISDS case, ruled in June 2023 that the South Korean government should pay 69 billion won plus delayed interest, totaling 130 billion won.
The government disagreed with this ruling and filed a lawsuit in July of the same year with the British court responsible for the case to cancel the PCA decision. The South Korean government argued, “The National Pension Service is a separate legal entity from the government, so it is inappropriate for the government to bear compensation.”
The British court’s first instance dismissed the government’s lawsuit in August 2024, but the appellate court overturned the decision. The retrial court ruled on the 23rd of last month, “The judgment premised on the National Pension Service being a state agency was incorrect,” siding with the government. While either party could have appealed the retrial decision, both the government and Elliott chose not to, leading the case back to arbitration.
The Ministry of Justice explained the decision not to appeal, stating, “Considering the British court’s clear ruling that the National Pension Service is not a state agency, the likelihood of success on appeal, and the balance of additional legal costs, we decided not to appeal.”
A source from the Ministry of Justice stated, “Utilizing the accumulated experience and expertise in responding to such cases, we will ensure a systematic and professional response through the International Investment Dispute Response Team in future arbitration proceedings.”
