CK Hutchison Holdings Limited (“CK Hutchison”) announces that it has commenced international arbitration proceedings against the Republic of Panama (“Panama”) for breaches of an investment protection treaty through sovereign acts that targeted a decades-old ports concession and destroyed CK Hutchison’s investments in Panama.
Panama Ports Company, Photo source: AP News
CK Hutchison notified Panama of a treaty dispute on 4 February 2026, following a year-long State attack campaign on the company’s assets, and sought to resolve the dispute to no avail.
Beginning in early 2025, Panama suddenly launched a State attack campaign against CK Hutchison investments that included a sudden new investigation that lacked due process, a
reversal of its longstanding legal position that had protected the ports concession for three decades as a matter of law, pursuing a governmental assault on the constitutionality of its own “contractlaw” and concession, and the development of a scheme to replace CK Hutchison subsidiary Panama Ports Company, S.A. (“PPC”). Panama has consistently sought to cover up its conduct through disinformation.
After notification of the treaty dispute in early 2026, rather than seeking resolution, Panama
intensified its State campaign through executive actions and a radical takeover of the Balboa and Cristóbal port terminals controlled by PPC on 23 February 2026, taking over property, equipment, technology, employees, and proprietary and protected documents and materials, all at great damage that provoked CK Hutchison to send a supplemental treaty notice.
Even after the takeover and supplemental treaty notice, Panama failed to take steps to resolve the treaty dispute and instead continued its campaign of attacks and disinformation.
Panama ultimately held only one perfunctory consultation meeting more than six months after the treaty notice, and has made no offer of compensation or resolution.
CK Hutchison Holdings Limited, Photo by Bastille Post
CK Hutchison commenced arbitration proceedings against Panama on 20 August 2026 seeking damages of more than US$1.5 billion for breaches of treaty obligations and international law. Panama has demonstrated that it has become a risky country that disregards the rule of law, corporate form, the scope of parties to a contract, the scope of arbitration agreements, treaty rights and the resolution of treaty disputes.
CK Hutchison’s treaty rights are distinct from PPC’s contract rights being pursued in a separate contract arbitration, which then proceeded apace. Panama previously sought, and failed, to force CK Hutchison into the contract arbitration, in disregard of corporate form and the applicable contract, as is a matter of public record.
CK Hutchison is sharing these developments due to Panama’s dissemination of inaccurate information over time. CK Hutchison also continues to seek resolution and permanently reserves all rights.
Panama Ports Company, Photo source: AP News
CK Hutchison Holdings Limited (“CKHH”) announces that it has notified the Republic of Panama of a dispute pursuant to an investment protection treaty in order to protect its rights and interests, and invited consultations in an ongoing effort to resolve measures taken by the Panamanian State that have impacted CKHH and Panama Ports Company S.A. (“PPC”), an indirect subsidiary of CKHH.
CKHH took this step based on cumulative measures by the Republic of Panama, including the announcement by the Judicial Branch on 29 January 2026 regarding the Supreme Court of Justice of Panama’s determination that Law No. 5 of January 16, 1997 (“Law No. 5”) is unconstitutional.
CK Hutchison Updates Status of Disputes Relating to PPC’s Terminal Operations in the Republic of Panama.
Law No. 5 has been the basis for the concession contract and operations of PPC at the ports of Balboa and Cristóbal, Panama for nearly three decades. CKHH considers a determination purporting that Law No. 5 is unconstitutional to be unlawful. Although the determination is yet to be published or come into force, the Panamanian State has advanced steps toward a forced exit of PPC and transition of the port sector, with no clarity as to operational plans.
In addition to CKHH’s treaty notification, and the arbitration commenced by PPC on 3 February 2026 pursuant to the applicable concession contract previously announced by CKHH in its voluntary announcement of 4 February 2026, CKHH will continue to consult with its legal counsel regarding all available recourse including additional national and international legal proceedings against the Republic of Panama and its agents and third parties colluding with them in this matter.
In this context, CKHH notes:
• an announcement of the Panama Maritime Authority of 30 January 2026 that it will rely on APM Terminals (“APMT”), an affiliate of A.P. Moller – Maersk A/S, as a temporary administrator of the PPC’s terminals at the ports of Balboa and Cristobal as part of a transition plan for the administration of the two ports; and
• APMT’s own announcement on 30 January 2026 of its willingness to assume the temporary operation of the two ports.
On 10 February 2026, Hutchison Port Holdings Limited (“HPH”) notified A.P. Moller – Maersk A/S that any steps by APMT or any of its affiliates to assume the administration or operation of PPC’s ports at Balboa or Cristobal in any capacity for any period of time without the agreement of CKHH will cause damages to CKHH, HPH and PPC and result in legal recourse against APMT and/or its affiliates involved.
CK Hutchison Updates Status of Disputes Relating to PPC’s Terminal Operations in the Republic of Panama.
Notwithstanding these developments, CKHH remains fully committed to ensuring that PPC will take all steps reasonably available to protect the employees who participate in its operations, to avoid disruptions to port operations, as well as customers and suppliers, and to facilitate the flow of vessels and cargo transiting the Panama Canal, as it always has, provided that the actions of the Panama Supreme Court and the Panamanian State permit.
The Panamanian State has given PPC no assurances or clarity regarding PPC’s operations at the ports of Balboa and Cristobal and continues to push toward a forced stoppage or takeover of PPC’s operations, causing further disruption and damage. If the publication of the Ruling results in the termination of PPC’s concession, the immediate result would be to render PPC’s operation of its terminals at the ports of Balboa and Cristobal impossible. Accordingly, at this stage, continued operation of the ports depends solely on actions of the Panama Supreme Court and the Panamanian State, which actions are of course wholly outside the control of CKHH, HPH and PPC.
