A/HRC/30/44 breached the obligations of Canada. Rather than fight, Canada withdrew the ban, notwithstanding health dangers.36 20. Metalclad v. Mexico involved a corporation suing Mexico for refusing to allow it to build a waste disposal which would pollute the Mexican water supply. The arbitrators granted Metalclad $16.79 million in compensation for lost profits.37 21. In 2013, the French transnational Veolia sued Egypt because of alleged loss of expected profits as a result of Egypt raising the minimum wage. The amount in controversy is $82 million.38 22. Aguas del Turani S.A. v. Republic of Bolivia concerned a contract privatizing the water supply of Cochabamba, including 40-year concessions with a guaranteed annual cash flow. The deal was endorsed by the World Bank, which imposed privatization as a condition for credit. The majority shareholders of Aguas were the American company Bechtel and the Spanish multinational Abengoa. After the contract was implemented in 1999, water prices increased sharply. When people demonstrated for their right to an affordable water supply, the then-Government declared martial law and tried to quell protests by military force. After the death of a 17-year-old adolescent, the Plurinational State of Bolivia cancelled the privatization contract and Aguas sued for $50 million.39 23. In 2009, the Swedish energy conglomerate Vattenfall sued Germany under the Energy Charter Treaty, demanding 1.4 billion euros in compensation for environmental measures restricting the use and discharge of cooling water into the River Elbe. Only after Germany agreed to lower its environmental standards was settlement reached, with adverse effects on the river and wildlife.40 Following the Fukushima disaster, the German public demanded the closure of nuclear plants and the Government of Germany decided on a phase-out of nuclear energy. Vattenfall is currently seeking 4 billion in compensation.41 24. One of the most egregious ICSID arbitrations concerned the case by United Statesbased Occidental Petroleum against Ecuador concerning the termination of an oil production site in the Amazon, and resulting in an award of $1.76 billion to Occidental ($2.4 billion with interest), which Ecuador accused of multiple human rights violations and environmental destruction.42 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/topics-domaines/dispdiff/ethyl.aspx?lang=eng and www.citizen.org/documents/egregious-investor-state-attacks-casestudies.pdf. www.citizen.org/documents/NAFTAReport_Final.pdf and solidarity-us.org/node/977. See also www.baerbel-hoehn.de/fileadmin/media/MdB/baerbelhoehn_de/ www_baerbelhoehn_de/ISDS_TAFTA_Bundestag.pdf and www.oecd.org/daf/inv/internationalinvestmentagreements/40077817.pdf. www.elstel.org/ISDS.html.en; infojustice.org/archives/34113. www.citizen.org/cmep/article_redirect.cfm?ID=9208, documents.foodandwaterwatch.org/doc/ICSID_web.pdf and www.elstel.org/ISDS.html.en. www.italaw.com/cases/documents/1655. Nathalie Bernasconi, “Background paper on Vattenfall v. Germany”, IISD; Rechtsanwälte Günther (2012) Briefing Note. The Coal-fired Power Plant Hamburg-Moorburg. www.fr-online.de/energie/atomausstieg-vattenfall-fordert-milliarden,1473634,21169258.html Power Shift (2012) Der deutsche Atomausstieg auf dem Prüfstand eines internationalen Investionsschiedsgericths? Hintergründe zum neuen Streitfall Vattenfall gegen Deutschland. www.iisd.org/pdf/2012/powershift_forum_briefing_vattenfall.pdf. One of the worst aspects of this case is that Ecuador was justified in terminating Occidental’s permit under Ecuadorian law and the contract and still the investor–State dispute settlement tribunal penalised Ecuador, www.citizen.org/documents/oxy-v-ecuador-memo.pdf. 11