avoiding billions in potential compensation.
1️⃣ Why the Lone Star decision is such a major headline
Headlines across Korea this morning read: "Government wins final ruling in Lone Star case". For many, it may feel like a case from the past suddenly resurfaced.
But this was far more than a dispute with a foreign fund— it was a case where billions in taxpayer money were at direct risk.
In 2022, Korea was ordered to pay USD 216 million, and with interest the amount could have approached the KRW 4 trillion range.
The 2025 ICSID Annulment Committee, however, voided the award entirely, overturning the result in one of the rarest outcomes in ISDS history.
This post breaks down everything from the beginning to what this decision means going forward.
2️⃣ The Lone Star case: A 13-year timeline
The dispute ties together Korea’s post-IMF restructuring, the sale of a major bank, and long-standing concerns over foreign capital.
📌 1) Lone Star acquires Korea Exchange Bank (KEB)
- 2003 – Lone Star buys 51% of KEB for roughly KRW 1.38 trillion.
- The sale sparked nationwide controversy over “fire-sale pricing.”
📌 2) Delayed approval for the bank sale
- 2007 – Attempt to sell KEB to HSBC fails amid delayed regulatory approval.
- 2012 – KEB is finally sold to Hana Financial for ~KRW 3.9 trillion.
📌 3) ISDS claim filed in 2012
Lone Star initiates an ICSID arbitration claiming USD 4.68 billion in damages.
📌 4) 2022 partial award
Korea is ordered to pay USD 216 million—about 4.6% of the original claim.
📌 5) 2025 annulment: Award fully voided
The ICSID Annulment Committee cancels the award entirely, eliminating all compensation obligations.
3️⃣ Key issues in the Lone Star dispute
1) Did the government delay approval?
Lone Star argued Korea intentionally delayed approval of the bank sale, reducing its proceeds.
2) Alleged undervaluation & taxation
Disputes arose about whether KEB was undervalued and whether taxes were applied correctly.
3) Procedural fairness in arbitration
The annulment decision centered on procedural flaws that undermined due process— a key reason the entire award was struck down.
4️⃣ The 2025 annulment ruling: What changed?
① The compensation obligation vanished
The annulment wiped out the 2022 partial award entirely. Korea now owes no compensation.
② A landmark ISDS precedent
Full annulments occur in less than 2% of ISDS cases—making this outcome internationally significant. Korea’s persistence and effective procedural challenge played a critical role.
5️⃣ What this decision means for Korea
1) Short-term: Fiscal risk removed
The immediate benefit is the removal of a multi-billion–won burden on public finances.
2) Long-term: Balancing investment climate and public oversight
Some in the global community may see this as a “government-friendly” result, highlighting the need for continued transparency and predictable regulatory processes.
3) Investor insight
- ISDS reminds us that states also face litigation risk.
- Such cases affect markets indirectly—policy, currency, capital flows.
- Understanding regulatory risk becomes crucial for long-term investors.
6️⃣ FAQ – Lone Star case
7️⃣ Summary & Takeaways
In a single sentence: This ruling not only saved billions in public funds but also tested Korea’s crisis-response capacity in international arbitration.
While the compensation risk is gone, the policy lessons surrounding foreign investment and financial regulation remain relevant.
For investors, viewing this case through the lens of risk governance may provide more insights than simply reading the headline.
A separate, deep-dive English analysis will be published next— stay tuned for cross-border comparisons and global investor perspectives.
0 Comments