Decisive Ruling by ICSID Annulment Committee
The Republic of Korea has secured a decisive legal victory against the U.S. private equity firm Lone Star Funds, with an annulment committee of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), a World Bank arbitration tribunal, ruling in favor of South Korea on Tuesday, November 18, 2025. This ruling completely nullifies a previous August 2022 decision that had ordered South Korea to pay $216.5 million in damages, plus interest, to Lone Star Funds. The total liability, including interest, had amounted to approximately 400 billion won (around $273.2 million).
Prime Minister Kim Min-seok, in an emergency briefing, hailed the decision as 'a significant achievement in protecting public finances and taxpayer money' and stated that it 'affirms Korea's sovereign right to financial regulation'. The annulment committee also ordered Lone Star Funds to reimburse the Korean government approximately 7.3 billion won (between $4.98 million and $5 million) in legal expenses within 30 days.
Background of the Protracted Dispute
The legal battle originated in November 2012 when Lone Star Funds initiated an Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) case against the South Korean government. The firm claimed that the Korean government had unfairly interfered in its attempt to sell its stake in Korea Exchange Bank (KEB), leading to alleged losses of $4.68 billion.
- 2003: Lone Star Funds acquired a 51% stake in KEB for 1.38 trillion won.
- 2012: The firm sold KEB to Hana Financial Group for 3.92 trillion won.
- The dispute was further complicated by public criticism regarding the 'bargain' sale of a major financial institution and allegations of stock manipulation involving KEB's credit card unit, as well as tax issues.
Grounds for Annulment
South Korea's successful annulment hinged on arguments that the original 2022 ICSID tribunal ruling contained severe procedural flaws. Specifically, the Korean government contended that the tribunal had improperly relied on an International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) arbitration award between Lone Star and Hana Financial Group. South Korea argued that it was not a party to this ICC proceeding and was therefore deprived of its right to present arguments and cross-examine witnesses, constituting a 'fundamental violation of procedural rules' and a 'serious departure from due process'.
A Rare Outcome in International Arbitration
The complete annulment of an ICSID award is an exceptionally rare occurrence. According to ICSID data, out of 503 rulings between 1972 and 2025, only 25 cases had their annulment applications accepted, and among these, only 8 cases resulted in a complete annulment. This represents a mere 1.6% probability of such an outcome. This victory marks a significant precedent and reinforces international confidence in Korea's regulatory and legal processes, as stated by Prime Minister Kim Min-seok.
9 Comments
Comandante
It's certainly a victory for South Korea's legal arguments, but the underlying issues surrounding the initial KEB sale and public criticism haven't entirely disappeared. This saga reveals deeper questions about financial governance.
Muchacho
An incredible legal achievement! Beating those odds is truly remarkable.
ZmeeLove
ICSID processes seem inherently flawed if such a rare annulment was even necessary. What a waste.
Habibi
The annulment doesn't change the fact Lone Star made massive profits. Still a bad look.
Coccinella
The procedural victory is a strong vindication for South Korea's legal team, proving the previous tribunal erred. Nevertheless, it doesn't fully address the lingering public sentiment about foreign equity firms making huge profits from domestic assets and the ethical implications involved.
lettlelenok
Fantastic news for South Korea and taxpayers! A truly decisive victory.
ytkonos
This annulment reinforces South Korea's sovereign right to regulate its markets, which is crucial. Yet, the rarity of such an outcome also underscores the difficulty countries face when challenging international arbitration decisions, making future ISDS cases still a concern.
dedus mopedus
This could deter foreign investment. Are international agreements truly reliable anymore?
Noir Black
Years of legal costs and uncertainty. Is this really a 'win' when so much was spent?