在新加坡亚化集团和西北化工公司诉中国政府一案中，环球律师事务所作为中方的独立代理律师，协助中国政府获得胜诉。这也是中国律所独立代理国际投资仲裁应诉案件首次胜诉。
该案由位于瑞士日内瓦、世界银行下属的国际投资争端解决中心（ICSID）裁决。仲裁庭以多数意见支持中方有关管辖权等重要问题的立场，驳回了申请人的所有主张。
据悉，申请人新加坡亚化集团的矿业位于四川省新建的大熊猫国家公园内，2018年2月，亚化集团的采矿权期限届满，四川省政府拒绝了该集团的采矿权续期申请，并责令其停止两处磷酸盐矿的开采活动。
申请人主张其投资被当地政府非法征收，且通过磋商后仍无法友好解决纠纷，遂依据《中华人民共和国政府和新加坡共和国政府关于促进和保护投资协定》（中新BIT），与UNCITRAL仲裁规则提起国际仲裁，由ICSID管理。
仲裁庭多数意见认为，中新BIT仅允许与征收补偿款额有关的争议（数量问题）提交国际仲裁，对于征收是否存在及其合法性争议（权利问题），仲裁庭没有管辖权。本案进一步明确了仲裁庭关于中国第一代BIT下可提交国际仲裁管辖范围的立场。
Global assists Chinese government’s victory in investment arbitration case
In the case of Singapore's AsiaPhos and Norwest Chemicals against People’s Republic of China, Beijing-headquartered Global Law Office, acting as independent counsel for the respondent, assisted the Chinese government in achieving a comprehensive victory. This marks the first successful independent representation by a Chinese law firm in an international investment arbitration case.
The case was ruled upon by the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), a subsidiary of the World Bank, located in Geneva, Switzerland. The arbitral tribunal, by a majority opinion, supported China's positions on important issues such as jurisdiction and rejected all claims by the claimants.
The claimant, AsiaPhos, operated mines within the newly established Giant Panda National Park in Sichuan Province. In February 2018, when the mining rights of AsiaPhos expired, the Sichuan government rejected the group's application for mining rights renewal and ordered the cessation of phosphate mining at two locations.
The claimants argued that their investment was unlawfully expropriated by the local government and that the dispute could not be amicably resolved through consultations. Accordingly, they invoked international arbitration under the China-Singapore Bilateral Investment Treaty (China-Singapore BIT) and UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, administered by ICSID.
The majority opinion of the arbitral tribunal held that the China-Singapore BIT only permits disputes related to the amount of expropriation compensation (quantitative issues) to be submitted to international arbitration. Disputes over the existence and legality of expropriation (rights issues) fall outside the tribunal's jurisdiction. This case further clarifies the tribunal's position on the scope of jurisdiction under China's first-generation BIT for international arbitration.
