Alexander Uff has over two decades of experience as a specialist in international commercial and investment treaty arbitration. Originally qualified as a barrister, Alexander was a partner in an elite global arbitration practice at Shearman & Sterling LLP for several years before joining Quadrant Chambers in 2021. He provides advice, representation and advocacy to corporations, States and State-owned entities in complex international commercial and investment treaty arbitrations, and also sits as an arbitrator.
Alexander’s work has focused in recent years on disputes in the energy, mining and construction / infrastructure sectors, investment treaty claims and commercial disputes, while his experience covers numerous other industries and subject matters including M&A, shareholder and joint venture disputes, pharmaceuticals, IP and licensing, retail, food industries, aviation, agribusiness and insurance, among others. He has conducted disputes under and/or advised on the Rules of all the major arbitration institutions including ICSID, ICC, LCIA, CRCICA, SIAC, HKIAC and AAA/ICDR, as well as ad hoc arbitrations including under the UNCITRAL Rules. Alexander’s practice is completely international and before relocating to London in 2013 he spent substantial parts of his career practicing international arbitration in Paris and New York, where he is also admitted. He has handled disputes in Western and Eastern Europe and CIS countries, North and South America, the Middle East, North and sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia and India.
Alexander has been recognized for several years as a “future leader” in international arbitration by Who’s Who Legal (2018-2021). The 2020 edition reports that he is ‘a name to remember in investment treaty arbitration’; while the 2021 edition describes him as ‘an extremely sharp and a creative lawyer’ with ‘great commercial sense’.
What the directories say
- "Alexander is a heavy hitter with a deep expertise in arbitration matters. He is a finely honed and compelling advocate, both orally and on paper." (Legal 500, 2024)
- "Superlative, practical, commercially sensible, to the point and strong on the law, he provides hard-hitting analysis and compelling presentation." (Legal 500, 2022)
- "He is a name to remember in investment treaty arbitration" (Who’s Who Arbitration Future Leader 2021)
- "He has good commercial sense" (Who’s Who Arbitration Future Leader 2021)
- "Alexander is an extremely sharp and a creative lawyer" (Who’s Who Arbitration Future Leader 2021)
- "Extremely clever and persuasive practitioner" (Who's Who Legal)
International Arbitration
- A European food manufacturer as Respondent in a CRCICA arbitration in Cairo against a North African licensee under a technology license agreement.
- Two subsidiaries of a North American mining and metals company in four LCIA arbitrations in London against a European trading firm. The dispute related to the performance of contracts for the sale and purchase of metal concentrates. English law applied.
- Advising UK petrochemicals companies in connection with a potential investment treaty claim against a central Asian state.
- A North African consulting company as Claimant in an ICC arbitration against North American oil services companies, in a dispute relating to oil drilling contracts.
- A North African State-owned mining and chemicals company, in relation to substantial claims for project delays, associated costs and alleged scope changes relating to the construction of two large scale chemical processing plants. The claims were first subject to expert determination in accordance with the ICC administered expertise procedure, and were then referred to ICC arbitration. The law of the Respondent’s home State applies.
- Alverley Investments Ltd and Germen Properties Ltd, Claimants in an ICSID arbitration against Romania (ICSID Case No. ARB/18/30). The dispute related to a multi-billion euro commercial and residential real estate project in northern Bucharest. The claims were brought under the Cyprus-Romania bilateral investment treaty.
- Two international contractors, Respondents in an ICC arbitration in London initiated by a Middle Eastern State-owned company. The dispute concerned the development of a world-class medical facility in the Middle East. The law of the Claimant’s State applied. Over USD 3.7 billion was at stake.
- A French-German consortium in an ICC arbitration in Stockholm against a Finnish utility company. The dispute arose from an agreement for the construction of a nuclear power plant in Finland. Finnish law governed. Over EUR 6.1 billion was at stake.
- Two African subsidiaries of an international mining and exploration company as Respondents in an ICC arbitration in London initiated by a South African contractor under a FIDIC contract. The dispute related to a mine expansion project in Sub-Saharan Africa. English law applied.
- Two Egyptian State-owned entities in a USD 6 billion ICC arbitration in Geneva and a USD 4 billion CRCICA arbitration in Cairo arising out of a long-term gas supply contract relating to the export of Egyptian gas to Israel. English law applied to both arbitrations. More than three quarters of the Claimants’ claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction or on the merits. Representing the Arab Republic of Egypt as Respondent in two investment arbitrations concerning alleged violations under the Egypt-Poland, Egypt-U.S. and the Egypt-Germany bilateral investment treaties relating to the performance of the same long-term contract for the supply of natural gas. Around USD 2 billion were claimed in the investment disputes. More than two thirds of the Claimants’ claims were dismissed on jurisdictional grounds and on the merits.
- A major European retail group as Claimant in an ICC arbitration against its Brazilian joint venture partner, in a dispute concerning a shareholders’ agreement relating to Brazil’s largest retailer arising following an M&A transaction.
- TNK-BP in a dispute with BP regarding TNK-BP’s lost participation in an Arctic exploration project. The amount at stake in the dispute was estimated at between USD 5 and 10 billion.
- A European chemicals company against European subsidiaries of a U.S. chemicals company, in several ICC arbitrations arising out of a joint venture agreement, relating to the use of intellectual property.
- A Middle Eastern development company, in an ICC arbitration initiated by a Middle Eastern contractor under a FIDIC contract, concerning a major urban development project in the Middle East. The law of the Middle Eastern State applied.
- A multinational agribusiness company as Respondent in an UNCILTRAL arbitration against a joint venture partner, relating to delays in the construction of a process plant in Ukraine.
Energy, mining and natural resources
- Advising on an ongoing basis a North American mining and metals group and its European subsidiaries, on numerous issues arising from their contractual arrangements and operations.
- A Middle Eastern energy company as Claimant in an UNCITRAL arbitration in London against an Asian manufacturer, relating to an agreement for the manufacture of oil drilling rigs.
- A North African consulting company as Claimant in an ICC arbitration against North American oil services companies, in a dispute relating to oil drilling contracts.
- Two subsidiaries of a North American mining and metals company in four LCIA arbitrations in London against a European trading firm. The dispute related to the performance of contracts for the sale and purchase of metal concentrates. English law applied.
- Advising UK petrochemicals companies in connection with a potential investment treaty claim against a central Asian state.
- Advising a North American natural resources investor in relation to an investment treaty claim concerning investments in the mining sector in an EU state.
- Two African subsidiaries of an international mining and exploration company as Respondents in an ICC arbitration in London initiated by a South African contractor under a FIDIC contract. The dispute related to a mine expansion project in Sub-Saharan Africa. English law applied.
- Two Egyptian State-owned entities in a USD 6 billion ICC arbitration in Geneva and a USD 4 billion CRCICA arbitration in Cairo arising out of a long-term gas supply contract relating to the export of Egyptian gas to Israel. English law applied to both arbitrations. More than three quarters of the Claimants’ claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction or on the merits. Representing the Arab Republic of Egypt as Respondent in two investment arbitrations concerning alleged violations under the Egypt-Poland, Egypt-U.S. and the Egypt-Germany bilateral investment treaties relating to the performance of the same long-term contract for the supply of natural gas. Around USD 2 billion were claimed in the investment disputes. More than two thirds of the Claimants’ claims were dismissed on jurisdictional grounds and on the merits.
- TNK-BP in a dispute with BP regarding TNK-BP’s lost participation in an Arctic exploration project. The amount at stake in the dispute was estimated at between USD 5 and 10 billion.
Infrastructure and technical disputes
- A Middle Eastern energy company, in an LCIA arbitration against an Asian manufacturer, relating to defects in the manufacture of oil drilling rigs.
- A North African State-owned mining and chemicals company, in relation to substantial claims for project delays, associated costs and alleged scope changes relating to the construction of two large scale chemical processing plants. The claims were first subject to expert determination in accordance with the ICC administered expertise procedure, and were then referred to ICC arbitration. The law of the Respondent’s home State applies.
- Two international contractors, Respondents in an ICC arbitration in London initiated by a Middle Eastern State-owned company. The dispute concerned the development of a world-class medical facility in the Middle East. The law of the Claimant’s State applied. Over USD 3.7 billion was at stake.
- Two African subsidiaries of an international mining and exploration company, Respondents in an ICC arbitration in London initiated by a South African contractor under a FIDIC contract. The dispute related to a mine expansion project in Sub-Saharan Africa. English law applied.
- A French-German consortium in an ICC arbitration in Stockholm against a Finnish utility company. The dispute arose from an agreement for the construction of a nuclear power plant in Finland. Finnish law governed. Over EUR 6.1 billion was at stake.
- A Middle Eastern development company, in an ICC arbitration initiated by a Middle Eastern contractor under a FIDIC contract, concerning a major urban development project in the Middle East. The law of the Middle Eastern State applied.
- A multinational agribusiness company as Respondent in an UNCILTRAL arbitration against a joint venture partner, relating to delays in the construction of a process plant in Ukraine.
- A Scandinavian contractor, in an ICC arbitration against a Scandinavian owner relating to laying submarine telecommunications cables.
- A Southern African owner, in an ICC arbitration brought by the contractor under a FIDIC contract, in relation to the construction of a HEP project.
Commercial disputes
- A European food manufacturer as Respondent in a CRCICA arbitration in Cairo against a North African licensee under a technology license agreement.
- A major European retail group as Claimant in an ICC arbitration against its Brazilian joint venture partner, in a dispute concerning a shareholders’ agreement relating to Brazil’s largest retailer arising following an M&A transaction.
- A European pharmaceutical company, in an ICC arbitration against a North American pharmaceutical company in a dispute arising from an M&A transaction involving intellectual property rights.
- A European chemicals company against European subsidiaries of a U.S. chemicals company, in several ICC arbitrations arising out of a joint venture agreement, relating to the use of intellectual property.
- • A European manufacturer of aircraft components, in an ICC arbitration concerning a dispute with a US supplier.
- A multinational agribusiness company in an UNCITRAL arbitration against a joint venture partner relating to the exercise of put and call options over assets located in Ukraine.
- A Middle Eastern software distributor, in an ICC arbitration against a European software developer.
Investment Treaty Disputes
- Advising UK petrochemicals companies in connection with a potential investment treaty claim against a central Asian state.
- Advising a North American natural resources investor in relation to an investment treaty claim concerning investments in the mining sector in an EU state.
- Alverley Investments Ltd and Germen Properties Ltd, Claimants in an ICSID arbitration against Romania (ICSID Case No. ARB/18/30). The dispute related to a multi-billion euro commercial and residential real estate project in northern Bucharest. The claims were brought under the Cyprus-Romania bilateral investment treaty.
- The Arab Republic of Egypt as Respondent in two investment arbitrations concerning alleged violations under the Egypt-Poland, Egypt-U.S. and the Egypt-Germany bilateral investment treaties arising out of a long-term gas supply contract relating to the export of Egyptian gas to Israel, as well as representing two Egyptian State-owned entities in a USD 6 billion ICC arbitration in Geneva and a USD 4 billion CRCICA arbitration in Cairo arising out of the same long-term contract for the supply of natural gas. Around USD 2 billion were claimed in the investment disputes. More than two thirds of the Claimants’ claims were dismissed on jurisdictional grounds and on the merits.
- Subsidiaries of two North American investors, in an investment treaty claim against a South East Asian State relating to the expropriation of a power plant.
