South Korea wins complete ISDS victory against Schindler in Hyundai Elevator dispute

The Korean government has won in full in an ISDS dispute with Schindler, the Swiss elevator maker, in a case valued at about 320 billion won. The arbitral ruling was issued in the early hours of today.

Schindler was one of Hyundai Elevator’s two major shareholders. The company filed the dispute in 2018, arguing that the Korean government did not regulate sufficiently during Hyundai Elevator’s paid-in capital increase, and that this regulator action or inaction caused Hyundai Elevator’s share price to fall.

현대아산타워 전경
Representative image for context; not directly related to the specific event in this article. License: CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: Wikimedia Commons.

The arbitral tribunal ruled in Korea’s favor on all claims, delivering a complete victory for the government. The decision ends the dispute with the investor’s allegations rejected in full. The public summary provided does not specify any damages award.

The case was brought under a bilateral investment treaty between Korea and Switzerland, utilizing the ISDS framework that allows private investors to seek redress for alleged harms caused by government actions.

Hyundai Elevator is a major Korean maker of elevators and escalators, a key player in Korea’s manufacturing and construction equipment sector. Schindler, based in Switzerland, is a long-standing competitor in the global elevator industry.

현대엘리베이터 BAX-VF 제어반
Representative image for context; not directly related to the specific event in this article. License: CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: Wikimedia Commons.

For U.S. readers, the ruling matters because it illustrates how cross-border investment disputes can hinge on regulatory actions taken during corporate financing in Korea. A full Korea victory in such disputes may influence foreign investors’ risk assessments and expectations about Korea’s regulatory environment and the protections available under investment treaties.

The decision also has implications for U.S. companies involved in Korea’s supply chains for building technologies and heavy equipment. It highlights the continuing relevance of investment protection frameworks, and it could shape how multinational firms evaluating Korea as an investment or procurement hub view regulatory certainty and the potential recourse available under ISDS.

Subscribe to Journal of Korea

Don’t miss out on the latest issues. Sign up now to get access to the library of members-only issues.
jamie@example.com
Subscribe