Global Chair of the International Arbitration Practice, Sebastian Seelmann-Eggebert impresses clients with his experience and legal intuition: “He is a very experienced guy and has great judgement; he can walk into a room and in ten minutes he understands what's going on and not just what is being said. It's a rare skill.”Chambers Global 2013

Sebastian Seelmann-Eggebert

Hamburg | London
  • Warburgstrasse 50
  • 20354 Hamburg
  • Germany
 
 

Sebastian Seelmann-Eggebert, a partner in the Hamburg and London offices, advises and represents companies, individuals, and states in disputes with a particular focus on international arbitration.

Mr. Seelmann-Eggebert’s experience in arbitration includes acting as lead counsel in a number of complex disputes involving public international law and the substantive laws of Austria, Azerbaijan, Croatia, Germany, Macedonia, Russia, Thailand, Sweden, Switzerland, and Ukraine among other countries, and conducted under the rules of the DIS, ICC, ICSID, SCC, and UNCITRAL, as well as under ad hoc rules. He regularly advises clients from the energy, insurance, media, telecommunications, banking, and construction industries.

Mr. Seelmann-Eggebert has also handled a large number of high-profile cases before the German courts, including the Federal Constitutional Court.

Mr. Seelmann-Eggebert is consistently listed as a leading name for Arbitration and leading directories (Who's Who Legal, JUVE, Chambers Global and Chambers Europe, Handelsblatt Best Lawyers, Legal 500 Germany) recommend him regularly for Litigation. Clients describe him as "very calm and composed even in the most stressful situations during the course of an arbitration, including the hearing." (Chambers Europe Germany 2018).

He was included in the ICSID list of arbitrators and conciliators in 2013.

Mr. Seelmann-Eggebert has acted as lead counsel in various representative cases, including:

  • Gilward Investments B.V. v. Ukraine as Counsel of the respondent in an ICSID arbitration against claims relating to the insolvency of Aerosvit, a Ukrainian airline
  • van Riet v. Republic of Croatia as Counsel to the Respondent in an ICSID arbitration for alleged violations of a bilateral investment protection agreement (BIT) in connection with a real estate investment
  • Sri Trang Agro v. Semperit as Counsel to the Respondents in a comprehensive joint venture dispute in the healthcare industry
  • Indorama International Finance Limited v. the Arab Republic of Egypt as Counsel to the Claimant in an ICSID arbitration involving breaches of a bilateral investment treaty in relation to an investment in the textiles industry 
  • Strabag v. Libya as Counsel to the Claimant in an ICSID (Additional Facility) arbitration involving breaches of a bilateral investment treaty in relation to several major infrastructure projects
  • Guardian Fiduciary Trust v. The Republic of Macedonia as Counsel to the Respondent in an ICSID arbitration involving alleged breaches of a bilateral investment treaty in relation to the financial services industry
  • Barmek v. The Republic of Azerbaijan as Counsel of the Respondent in an ICSID arbitration involving issues of alleged expropriation under bilateral investment treaties in relation to a concession agreement for the operation of electrical grids 
  • Adria Beteiligungs GmbH v. The Republic of Croatia as Counsel of the Respondent in an UNCITRAL arbitration under the aegis of the Permanent Court of Arbitration involving issues of alleged expropriation under bilateral investment treaties in relation to a gaming concession agreement
  • Swisslion DOO Skopje v. The Republic of Macedonia as Counsel of the Respondent in an ICSID arbitration involving alleged breaches of a bilateral investment treaty in relation to an investment in the agriculture and food industry 
 
 
 
Notice: We appreciate your interest in Latham & Watkins. If your inquiry relates to a legal matter and you are not already a current client of the firm, please do not transmit any confidential information to us. Before taking on a representation, we must determine whether we are in a position to assist you and agree on the terms and conditions of engagement with you. Until we have completed such steps, we will not be deemed to have a lawyer-client relationship with you, and will have no duty to keep confidential the information we receive from you. Thank you for your understanding.