Christopher Moore’s practice focuses on international arbitration and litigation.

He regularly advises and represents public companies and sovereign nations in the most strategically important and highest-value matters, and is the co-head of the firm’s global arbitration practice.

Chris has represented multinational corporations in complex international commercial arbitrations across a broad range of sectors, including energy and natural resources, infrastructure, financial services and post-M&A related disputes, seated in the world’s most frequently selected arbitral seats and administered by the leading arbitration institutions, including the ICC, LCIA, SCC, SIAC, HKIAC, and ICDR, and in litigation matters before state and federal courts throughout the United States.

Chris also has extensive experience representing both investors and states in investor-state disputes and in international litigation proceedings, including litigation involving the immunity of foreign states and their agencies under the U.S. Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act and public international law.

He is currently based in London, and from 2000-2012 was resident in the New York office.

Read More

Notable Experiences

International Commercial Arbitration

  • A multinational energy company in relation to several LNG-related contracts impacted by sanctions.

  • A multinational energy company in an ICC proceeding arising from a breach of multiple supply agreements for the sale and purchase of solar power modules.

  • Telecom Italia International N.V and Telecom Italia S.p.A in an ICC arbitration in Paris, involving a $15 billion dispute under a settlement agreement resolving a previous contest for control of a Brazilian company, in which all claims against Telecom Italia were dismissed.

  • A telecom company in post-M&A dispute related to sale of cellular communications operator. 

  • A multinational food distributor in LCIA arbitration arising out of litigation funding agreement.

  • A global pharmaceutical company in LCIA arbitration proceedings arising out of distribution agreement related to the supply of medical products in Kuwait.

  • A North American automotive supplier in a DIS arbitration under German law relating to the validity and breach of a long-term supply agreement involving claims in excess of $1 billion.

  • A major oil and gas company in an SCC arbitration seated in Stockholm relating to a shareholder dispute in a Greek joint venture company.

  • ENI North Africa B.V. in an ICC arbitration based on a long-term contract for the sale of Libyan gas in Italy.

  • A Dubai-based investment fund in a confidential LCIA arbitration governed by English law related to the Kazakh telecom sector.

  • A privately owned bank in the UAE in LCIA arbitration arising out of financing arrangement related to major construction project in Abu Dhabi.

  • A construction company in an ICC arbitration seated in London arising out of EPC agreement.

  • A commercial space satellite launch service provider in an UNCITRAL arbitration seated in Stockholm involving claims alleging the breach of certain contracts governing the provision of space satellite launching services.

  • A Singapore-based investment fund in an LCIA arbitration concerning a joint venture in Ethiopia.

See More

Disputes Involving Foreign States and State-Owned Entities

  • The Hellenic Republic in an ICSID arbitration brought by Poštová banks a.s. and Istrokapital SE, under the Hellenic Republic-Slovak Republic and Hellenic Republic-Cyprus bilateral investment treaties, resulting in dismissal of all claims for lack of jurisdiction and subsequent confirmation by an ICSID ad hoc committee.

  • The Hellenic Republic in two pending ICSID arbitrations brought by Cyprus Popular Bank Public Co. Ltd and Bank of Cyprus Public Co. Ltd under the Cyprus-Hellenic Republic bilateral investment treaty.

  • The Republic of Austria in the first ICSID arbitration brought against that state, resulting in dismissal of all claims for lack of jurisdiction.

  • The Government of Georgia in relation to a construction-related dispute under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules.

  • The Republic of Argentina in the defense of numerous cases brought in connection with Argentina’s 2001 economic crises, including defeating several attempts by creditors to obtain restraining orders and/or orders of attachment (see, e.g., EM Ltd. v. Republic of Argentina, 131 F. App’x 745 (2d Cir. 2005); Capital Ventures Int’l v. Republic of Argentina, 280 F. App’x 14 (2d Cir. 2008)), defeating a creditor’s attempt to seize Argentina’s presidential airplane (see Colella v. Republic of Argentina, 2007 WL 1545204 (N.D. Cal. May 29, 2007) (declaring Argentina’s presidential airplane immune from execution)), and advising the Republic of Argentina in connection with the restraint of the Argentine warship ARA Libertad in Ghana and the ultimate release of that vessel.

  • Argentine Province of Mendoza in its defeat of attempts to block the restructuring of its external debt (see Greylock Global Opportunity Master Fund Ltd. v. Province of Mendoza, 162 F. App’x 85 (2d Cir. 2006) (affirming summary judgment on claims challenging “exit consent” amendments to sovereign debt indenture); Rabbi Jacob Joseph Sch. v. Province of Mendoza, 425 F.3d 207 (2d Cir. 2005)).

  • The Republic of Nicaragua on litigation aspects of its external commercial debt cash buyback offer.

  • Investors in securing favorable awards in confidential UNCITRAL arbitrations against state related to seizure of refinery.

See More

Civil Litigation

  • BHP Billiton in connection with litigation stemming from BHP Billiton’s unsolicited $40 billion all-cash offer to acquire PotashCorp.

  • Citigroup, a former tenant in 7 World Trade Center, in litigation related to the collapse of that building on September 11, 2001.

  • A major financial institution in litigation concerning proprietary software designed to value complex financial instruments.

  • Foreign and domestic companies in litigation involving patent and trademark disputes, including the Italian motorcycle manufacturer Ducati in a motorcycle naming rights case.

See More

Pro Bono

  • Co-chair of the London Pro Bono Committee. Current pro bono projects in the London office include: Death penalty project in collaboration with Reprieve and Cornell Law School; assisting individuals seeking resettlement through the International Refugee Assistance Project; sponsoring Toynbee Hall’s women-only Saturday morning Free Legal Advice Clinic; and advising The Entrepreneurial Refugee Network, which supports refugees seeking to start new businesses in the UK.

  • Obtained the release of an improperly held detainee from Guantánamo Bay and successfully obtained asylum relief for him in Albania. See Zakirjan v. Bush, No. 05-Cv-2053 (D.D.C.) (HHK); see also Hamlily v. Gates, No. 07-1127 (D.C. Cir.) (representing detainee ultimately released to Algeria).

  • Pro bono representation of the family of a victim of the September 11 attacks before the September 11 Victim Compensation Fund.

See More

Selected Activities

  • Member of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) Institute
  • Member of the International Bar Association (IBA)
  • Member of the International Council for Commercial Arbitration (ICCA)
  • Member of the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA)
  • ICC Institute Masterclass for Arbitrators

Publications

“International Bar Association Publishes Revisions to Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, March 8, 2024

“Five International Arbitration Trends and Topics for 2024,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, January 4, 2023 

“The Control Test in the UK’s Sanctions Framework: Recent Developments,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, November 28, 2023 

“Linking Producers and Offtakers Is Key To Scaling up Hydrogen,” Cleary Gottlieb, October 4, 2023 

“The Lithium Triangle: Challenges and Opportunities for Latin America,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, September 25, 2023  

“U.S. Supreme Court Authorizes Foreign Plaintiffs To Use Domestic RICO Statute In Aid Of Enforcement Of Arbitral Awards In The United States,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, July 3, 2023  

“ICSID Awards,” The Guide to Challenging and Enforcing Arbitration Awards - Third Edition, May 22, 2023

“Five International Arbitration Trends And Topics For 2023,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, January 30, 2023 

“Amended ICSID Arbitration Rules Enter Into Force,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, July 15, 2022

“U.S. Supreme Court Denies Applicability of Section 1782 Discovery Statute With Respect to Private Commercial and Treaty Arbitrations,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, June 15, 2022

“Current Trends in Sovereign Debt Dispute Resolution,” Cleary Gottlieb, May 19, 2022

“Trends in African Arbitration,” Cleary Gottlieb, April 12, 2022

“Investor-State Arbitration in the Energy Sector Likely as Green Transition Accelerates,” Cleary Gottlieb, February 9, 2022

“Confirmation of English Law Approach to Law Governing the Validity of the Arbitration Agreement,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, December 22, 2021

“Trade and Foreign Direct Investment Stimulus In Africa: Impacts on Dispute Resolution,” International Bar Association, Arbitration Committee bulletin, November 24, 2021

“The CJEU Finds Investor-State Arbitration Clause in the Energy Charter Treaty Inapplicable to Intra-EU Disputes,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, September 27, 2021 

“Natural Resources Disputes in Africa,” Africa Outlook Quarterly Wrap, September 1, 2021

“The New Supplemental Arrangement Concerning Enforcement of Arbitral Awards between Mainland China and Hong Kong,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, August 25, 2021 

“Second Circuit Reinforces Its Approach To Section 1782 While U.S. Supreme Court Case On Application Of Section 1782 To Private International Arbitration Remains Pending,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, July 19, 2021 

“ICSID Awards,” The Guide to Challenging and Enforcing Arbitration Awards - Second Edition, July 8, 2021 

“The Changing Landscape of Arbitration in Switzerland: Advent of the Swiss Arbitration Centre and the 2021 Swiss Rules Revision,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, June 17, 2021 

“Trade and Foreign Direct Investment Stimulus In Africa: Impacts on Dispute Resolution?,” Africa Outlook Quarterly Wrap, March 15, 2021

“The Scope of Immunity for International Organizations Comes Under Scrutiny Again, Two Years After the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision in Jam v. International Finance Corporation,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, March 1, 2021

“2020 Revision of the IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, February 17, 2021 

“U.S. Supreme Court Defines Contours of FSIA’s Expropriation Exception,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, February 8, 2021 

“2021 ICC Rules Of Arbitration Unveiled,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, November 12, 2020 

“U.K. Supreme Court Decision Answers the Question: What Law Governs Your Arbitration Agreement?,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, November 04, 2020 

“The London Court of International Arbitration Releases Updated Arbitration Rules, Emphasizing Efficiency,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, October 26, 2020

“Judgment Creditor Successfully Challenges ‘Uncertain’ Arbitration Award in the English Court,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, July 16, 2020

“Circuit Split Intensifies Over Use of 28 U.S.C. § 1782 to Obtain Discovery for Use in Private International Arbitration,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, July 13, 2020 

“International Arbitration in the Time of COVID-19: Navigating the Evolving Procedural Features and Practices of Leading Arbitral Institutions,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, July 10, 2020

“In Annulment Proceedings Over ICC Award, Paris Court Rules on Nature of U.S., EU, and UN Sanctions,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, July 20, 2020)

“Supreme Court Holds That New York Convention Does Not Preclude Non-Signatories From Invoking State Law Principles To Compel Arbitration,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, June 3, 2020

“Most EU Member States Agree to Terminate Their Intra-EU Bilateral Investment Treaties,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, May 7, 2020

“COVID-19: Public Health Emergency Measures and State Defenses in International Investment Law,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, April 28, 2020

“U.S. District Court Denies Section 1782 Discovery for Use in DIS Arbitration, Highlighting Deepening Circuit Split on Statute’s Applicability to Private Commercial Arbitrations,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, April 3, 2020

“The Impact of Sanctions on Arbitration: A Recent Case Study Involving the EU Sanctions Regime,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, September 16, 2019

“Sanctions and Arbitration,” IBA Arbitration Committee newsletter, September 2019

“African States Launch the Operational Phase of the African Continental Free Trade Area Agreement,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, July 31, 2019

“Cross-Examination Against the Clock,” Take the Witness: Cross-Examination in International Arbitration,, 2nd edition. Co-authored by Christopher Moore and Richard Kreindler, March 2019

“Annulment of UK Award Does Not Entail Removal of Arbitrators When Proceedings are Re-Opened,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, December 17, 2018

“The HKIAC Council Approves the 2018 Administered Arbitration Rules,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, October 22, 2018

“Competing Priorities in the Fight Against Doping,” Russian Arbitration Association September 2018 Newsletter

“Bridgestone Arbitral Tribunal Rules That Trademarks and Trademark Licenses May Constitute Protected Investments,” Oxford Business Law Blog, May 2018

Thorny Questions for IP Rights Under Investment Treaties, Law360, March 14, 2018

“European Court of Justice: Investor-State Arbitration Under Intra-EU Bilateral Investment Treaties Is Incompatible With EU Law,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, March 9, 2018 

“Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements Enters into Force,” Business Law Review, Wolters Kluwer. Co-authored by Christopher Moore, Nathaniel Jedrey and Konrad Rodgers. February 2016

Events