Werner Eyskens

As an arbitrator:

• Sitting as sole arbitrator on a distributorship dispute (CEPANI, Belgian law)
• Sitting as chairman in a post M&A claim in the real estate industry (CEPANI, Belgian law)
• Sitting as sole arbitrator in a dispute on the termination of a consultancy agreement with an international public institution (ad hoc)
• Sitting as chairman in a post M&A claim in the insurance industry (CEPANI, Belgian law)
• Sitting as chairman in a dispute on insurance pay out coverage in relation to infrastructure works (ad hoc)
• Sitting as chairman in a dispute on tolling agreements in the oil industry (CEPANI, Belgian law).
• Sitting as co-arbitrator in a dispute between defence contractors under NATO contract arrangements (ICC, Belgian law).
  
  

As legal counsel in arbitration proceedings:

• Representing a US Fortune500 company on delays, defects and counterclaims under a construction agreement with a Mexican subcontractor (ICC, New York law). This matter involved a large number of exhibits and more than 20 fact and expert witnesses which were examined during a weeks-long evidentiary hearing.
• Representing a European logistics group in CEPANI arbitration proceedings on alleged breaches of representations and warranties of a share purchase agreement with a private equity investment fund, including ensuring set aside proceedings.
• Representing a major Belgian infrastructure asset operator in an LCIA arbitration between its institutional joint venture shareholders regarding claims for breaches of confidentiality obligations under the various shareholder agreements.
• Representing a Luxembourg Owner in ICC and SIAC arbitration proceedings against a Korean shipyard and against Korean banks under related bank guarantees. These arbitration proceedings involved SIAC emergency arbitration proceedings and Seoul court proceedings.
• Representing an ABInbev group entity in a beverages distribution dispute (ICC, Belgian law)
• Representing a marine construction company in relation to the Panama Canal enlargement works (ICC, Belgian law)
• Representing a marine contractor on claims under charter party agreements (ASA, Swiss law)
• Representing a seller of shares in a distressed financial institution to Qatari Purchasers in relation to claims under the SPA (ICC, Belgian/New York law).
• Representing a seller on claims for breaches of warranties under an SPA for shares in publicity and press distribution industry (CEPANI, Belgian law)
• Representing a marine contractor on marine construction works in the Philippines (ICSID)
• Representing a contractor on claims for breaches of warranties under an SPA for the sale of an on shore construction business (CEPANI, Belgian law)
• Representing an off shore contractor on claims against a shipyard for breach of a construction agreement for a cable lay vessel (ICC, English law)
• Representing PE investors as purchasers on claims for breaches of warranties under an SPA for the sale of a global auxiliary power unit business (CEPANI, Belgian law)
• Representing a PE investors as sellers on claims for breaches and warranties under SPA for sale of an OTC pharmaceuticals business (CEPANI, Belgian law). This relates to the sale of Omega Pharma to Perrigo and the publicly reported ensuing dispute; this is the largest claim ever brought in CEPANI administered proceedings.
• Representing a listed marine brokerage business on the termination by an Argentine oil & gas company of a service and charter agreement of an liquefaction vessel (LCIA, including emergency arbitration proceedings, English law)
• Representing a west African port operator on defects in the construction of a break water structure (ICC, Benin law)
• Representing a multinational off shore operator on delays and construction incidents under a construction agreement with a Chinese shipyard and a German crane manufacturer (SIAC, English law)

Acting for a contractor on a data centre contraction project (CEPANI, Belgian law).


As legal counsel in state court proceedings:

• Representing the State of Hungary/Pfzer COVID 19 vaccines. We act for this sovereign client in Brussels court proceedings, where Hungary is sued by Pfizer for payment of substantial amounts under the EUR 34bln COVID-19 vaccine program Purchase Agreement which was negotiated between the EU Commission and Pfizer. The circumstances of the negotiation of this Purchase Agreement, which was conducted directly between the President of the EU Commission and the Pfizer CEO, was widely reported in the international press. Pfizer first attempted to have these payment proceedings fast-tracked, but we were successful in convincing the court that the conditions for these fast-track proceedings were not satisfied. The proceedings are ongoing. Pfizer announced that it will seek for more vaccines deliveries to be enforced whilst the State of Hungary (and other CEE EU Member States) have raised that there is no longer a demand for vaccinations, which therefore will need to be destroyed upon delivery.
• Representing SAirGroup and SAirLines, the formerly listed holding entities of Swissair, the now bankrupt flag carrier of Switzerland. This matter results from intensive political, economic and legal convulsions that struck Belgium in the period immediately after the 9/11 attacks, and which had fare reaching ramifications in the Belgian aviation industry and the national political narrative of the government that was then in place. This led to bankruptcy of the Belgian flag carrier Sabena, which in turn spawned proceedings on liability claims by the Belgian State (as majority shareholder of Sabena) and the bankruptcy trustee of Sabena against SAirGroup and SAirLines (which were the minority shareholders of Saena). The Belgian State and the Sabena trustee pursue liability and shadow director claims against SAirGroup and SAirLines in Belgium and in Switzerland. These proceedings were initiated in 2001 and have been ongoing since. They involve:
  • • • • a parliamentary investigation committee proceeding;
        • two separate criminal proceedings;
        • civil liability proceedings (in total more than EUR 2,5 bln in principal was claimed (but these claims are likely to be reduced to less than EUR2 bln now));
        • proceedings before the International Court of Justice against the Swiss Confederation;
        • various insolvency proceedings in the Swiss courts; and
        • for both the Belgian criminal and civil proceedings, the case went up the Supreme Court.

The civil proceedings are currently suspended following an appeal court decision of 2021.

• Representing Telenet in the long-running dispute between Telenet and Proximus about Telenet’s acquisition of the cable networks of Interkabel, a group of municipalities, in 2008. In December 2017, Proximus claimed EUR 1,36 billion for being denied an opportunity to bid on the networks and television subscribers of the municipalities in 2008. Telenet acquired these cable networks and TV subscribers which significantly expanded its cable TV footprint and subscriber base. Proximus claims that, since the embers of Interkabel were public bodies, a tender should have been organized before the sale. The case was argued in:
  • • • • summary injunction proceedings, ex parte and inter partes
        • the Antwerp Enterprise Court and the Antwerp Appeal Court
        • the State Council
        • the ECJ for a preliminary ruling
        • the Supreme Court
        • the Brussels Appeal Court, after a partial reversal by the Supreme Court
• Acting for a listed seller of shares on claims brought by an unsuccessful bidder under specific confidentiality and exclusivity on agreements in the Brussels Courts.

• Chambers Global: Belgium, Dispute Resolution: Arbitration, Band 3, 2022–present

• Legal 500 EMEA: Belgium, Dispute Resolution, Leading Partner, 2023–present

• Legal 500 EMEA: Belgium, Industry Focus: Transport, Leading Individual, 2023–2024