Christopher Moore is the co-head of the firm’s global international arbitration practice.

His practice focuses on international arbitration and litigation, including commercial and investor-state disputes.

Chris has represented multinational corporations in complex international commercial arbitrations across a broad range of sectors, including energy and natural resources, infrastructure, financial services and post-M&A related disputes, seated in the world’s most frequently selected arbitral seats and administered by the leading arbitration institutions, including the ICC, LCIA, SCC, SIAC, HKIAC, and ICDR, and in litigation matters before state and federal courts throughout the United States.

Chris also has extensive experience representing both investors and states in investor-state disputes and in international litigation proceedings, including litigation involving the immunity of foreign states and their agencies under the U.S. Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act and public international law.

He is currently based in London, and from 2000-2012 was resident in the New York office.

Notable Experience

International Commercial Arbitration

  • A multinational energy company in relation to several LNG-related contracts impacted by sanctions.

  • Total Global Procurement in an ICC arbitration proceeding arising from a breach of multiple supply agreements for the sale and purchase of solar power modules.

  • Telecom Italia International N.V and Telecom Italia S.p.A in an ICC arbitration in Paris, involving a $15 billion dispute under a settlement agreement resolving a previous contest for control of a Brazilian company, in which all claims against Telecom Italia were dismissed.

  • A telecom company in post-M&A dispute related to sale of cellular communications operator. 

  • Sysco in a New York seated LCIA arbitration brought by its litigation funder.

  • A multinational company in LCIA arbitration proceedings arising out of distribution agreement related to the supply of goods to counterparty based in Kuwait.

  • A major power plant in connection with a dispute arising out of termination of long term coal supply contract governed by English law.

  • A North American automotive supplier in a DIS arbitration under German law relating to the validity and breach of a long-term supply agreement involving claims in excess of $1 billion.

  • A major oil and gas company in an SCC arbitration seated in Stockholm relating to a shareholder dispute in a Greek joint venture company.

  • ENI North Africa B.V. in an ICC arbitration based on a long-term contract for the sale of Libyan gas in Italy.

  • A Dubai-based investment fund in a confidential LCIA arbitration governed by English law related to the Kazakh telecom sector.

  • A privately owned bank in the UAE in LCIA arbitration arising out of financing arrangement related to major construction project in Abu Dhabi.

  • A construction company in an ICC arbitration seated in London arising out of EPC agreement.

  • A commercial space satellite launch service provider in an UNCITRAL arbitration seated in Stockholm involving claims alleging the breach of certain contracts governing the provision of space satellite launching services.

  • A Singapore-based investment fund in an LCIA arbitration concerning a joint venture in Ethiopia.

See More

Disputes Involving Foreign States and State-Owned Entities

  • The Hellenic Republic in successfully defeating claims challenging the terms of the state’s €200 billion sovereign debt restructuring in three ICSID arbitrations: Poštová banka a.s. and Istrokapital SE, resulting in dismissal of all claims for lack of jurisdiction and subsequent confirmation by an ICSID ad hoc committee, as well as two separate ICSID arbitrations brought by Cyprus Popular Bank Public Co. Ltd and Bank of Cyprus Public Co. Ltd under the Cyprus-Hellenic Republic bilateral investment treaties.

  • The Bank of Spain in connection with successfully defending claims asserted against the Kingdom of Spain in proceedings brought by shareholders in Banco Popular, under the Spain-Mexico BIT.

  • The Republic of Austria in the first ICSID arbitration brought against that state, resulting in dismissal of all claims for lack of jurisdiction.

  • The Federal Republic of Nigeria in an ICSID arbitration brought by Shell under the Netherlands-Nigeria BIT in relation to an oil spill in the Niger Delta. The case ended favorably in 2022 with the discontinuance of the case.

  • The Government of Georgia in relation to a construction-related dispute under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules.

  • The Republic of Argentina in the defense of numerous cases brought in connection with Argentina’s 2001 economic crises, including defeating several attempts by creditors to obtain restraining orders and/or orders of attachment (see, e.g., EM Ltd. v. Republic of Argentina, 131 F. App’x 745 (2d Cir. 2005); Capital Ventures Int’l v. Republic of Argentina, 280 F. App’x 14 (2d Cir. 2008)), defeating a creditor’s attempt to seize Argentina’s presidential airplane (see Colella v. Republic of Argentina, 2007 WL 1545204 (N.D. Cal. May 29, 2007) (declaring Argentina’s presidential airplane immune from execution)), and advising the Republic of Argentina in connection with the restraint of the Argentine warship ARA Libertad in Ghana and the ultimate release of that vessel.

  • Argentine Province of Mendoza in its defeat of attempts to block the restructuring of its external debt (see Greylock Global Opportunity Master Fund Ltd. v. Province of Mendoza, 162 F. App’x 85 (2d Cir. 2006) (affirming summary judgment on claims challenging “exit consent” amendments to sovereign debt indenture); Rabbi Jacob Joseph Sch. v. Province of Mendoza, 425 F.3d 207 (2d Cir. 2005)).

  • The Republic of Nicaragua on litigation aspects of its external commercial debt cash buyback offer.

  • A privately owned bank in the United Arab Emirates in an LCIA arbitration governed by English law arising out of claims related to financing of major infrastructure project.

  • Investors in securing favorable awards in confidential UNCITRAL arbitrations against state related to seizure of refinery.

See More

Civil Litigation

  • BHP Billiton in connection with litigation stemming from BHP Billiton’s unsolicited $40 billion all-cash offer to acquire PotashCorp.

  • Citigroup, a former tenant in 7 World Trade Center, in litigation related to the collapse of that building on September 11, 2001.

  • A major financial institution in litigation concerning proprietary software designed to value complex financial instruments.

  • Foreign and domestic companies in litigation involving patent and trademark disputes, including the Italian motorcycle manufacturer Ducati in a motorcycle naming rights case.

See More

Pro Bono

  • Co-chair of the London Pro Bono Committee. Current pro bono projects in the London office include: Death penalty project in collaboration with Reprieve and Cornell Law School; assisting individuals seeking resettlement through the International Refugee Assistance Project; sponsoring Toynbee Hall’s women-only Saturday morning Free Legal Advice Clinic; and advising The Entrepreneurial Refugee Network, which supports refugees seeking to start new businesses in the UK.

  • Obtained the release of an improperly held detainee from Guantánamo Bay and successfully obtained asylum relief for him in Albania. See Zakirjan v. Bush, No. 05-Cv-2053 (D.D.C.) (HHK); see also Hamlily v. Gates, No. 07-1127 (D.C. Cir.) (representing detainee ultimately released to Algeria).

  • Pro bono representation of the family of a victim of the September 11 attacks before the September 11 Victim Compensation Fund.

See More

Selected Activities

  • Member of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) Institute
  • Member of the International Bar Association (IBA)
  • Member of the International Council for Commercial Arbitration (ICCA)
  • Member of the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA)
  • ICC Institute Masterclass for Arbitrators


Sanctions, Certainty and Pragmatism – the Contemporary Context for Analysing Force Majeure clauses,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, June 4, 2024

U.S. Supreme Court Rules That Judges, Not Arbitrators, Decide If A Dispute Is Arbitrable When Multiple Agreements Conflict On The Question,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, May 28, 2024 

International Bar Association Publishes Revisions to Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, March 8, 2024 

Five International Arbitration Trends and Topics for 2024,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, January 4, 2023 

The Control Test in the UK’s Sanctions Framework: Recent Developments,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, November 28, 2023 

Linking Producers and Offtakers Is Key To Scaling up Hydrogen,” Cleary Gottlieb, October 4, 2023 

The Lithium Triangle: Challenges and Opportunities for Latin America,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, September 25, 2023  

U.S. Supreme Court Authorizes Foreign Plaintiffs To Use Domestic RICO Statute In Aid Of Enforcement Of Arbitral Awards In The United States,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, July 3, 2023  

ICSID Awards,” The Guide to Challenging and Enforcing Arbitration Awards - Third Edition, May 22, 2023

Five International Arbitration Trends And Topics For 2023,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, January 30, 2023 

Amended ICSID Arbitration Rules Enter Into Force,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, July 15, 2022

U.S. Supreme Court Denies Applicability of Section 1782 Discovery Statute With Respect to Private Commercial and Treaty Arbitrations,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, June 15, 2022

Current Trends in Sovereign Debt Dispute Resolution,” Cleary Gottlieb, May 19, 2022

Trends in African Arbitration,” Cleary Gottlieb, April 12, 2022

Investor-State Arbitration in the Energy Sector Likely as Green Transition Accelerates,” Cleary Gottlieb, February 9, 2022

Confirmation of English Law Approach to Law Governing the Validity of the Arbitration Agreement,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, December 22, 2021

Trade and Foreign Direct Investment Stimulus In Africa: Impacts on Dispute Resolution,” International Bar Association, Arbitration Committee bulletin, November 24, 2021

The CJEU Finds Investor-State Arbitration Clause in the Energy Charter Treaty Inapplicable to Intra-EU Disputes,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, September 27, 2021 

Natural Resources Disputes in Africa,” Africa Outlook Quarterly Wrap, September 1, 2021

The New Supplemental Arrangement Concerning Enforcement of Arbitral Awards between Mainland China and Hong Kong,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, August 25, 2021 

Second Circuit Reinforces Its Approach To Section 1782 While U.S. Supreme Court Case On Application Of Section 1782 To Private International Arbitration Remains Pending,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, July 19, 2021 

ICSID Awards,” The Guide to Challenging and Enforcing Arbitration Awards - Second Edition, July 8, 2021 

The Changing Landscape of Arbitration in Switzerland: Advent of the Swiss Arbitration Centre and the 2021 Swiss Rules Revision,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, June 17, 2021 

Trade and Foreign Direct Investment Stimulus In Africa: Impacts on Dispute Resolution?,” Africa Outlook Quarterly Wrap, March 15, 2021

The Scope of Immunity for International Organizations Comes Under Scrutiny Again, Two Years After the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision in Jam v. International Finance Corporation,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, March 1, 2021

2020 Revision of the IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, February 17, 2021 

U.S. Supreme Court Defines Contours of FSIA’s Expropriation Exception,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, February 8, 2021 

2021 ICC Rules Of Arbitration Unveiled,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, November 12, 2020 

U.K. Supreme Court Decision Answers the Question: What Law Governs Your Arbitration Agreement?,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, November 04, 2020 

The London Court of International Arbitration Releases Updated Arbitration Rules, Emphasizing Efficiency,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, October 26, 2020

Judgment Creditor Successfully Challenges ‘Uncertain’ Arbitration Award in the English Court,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, July 16, 2020

Circuit Split Intensifies Over Use of 28 U.S.C. § 1782 to Obtain Discovery for Use in Private International Arbitration,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, July 13, 2020 

International Arbitration in the Time of COVID-19: Navigating the Evolving Procedural Features and Practices of Leading Arbitral Institutions,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, July 10, 2020

In Annulment Proceedings Over ICC Award, Paris Court Rules on Nature of U.S., EU, and UN Sanctions,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, July 20, 2020)

Supreme Court Holds That New York Convention Does Not Preclude Non-Signatories From Invoking State Law Principles To Compel Arbitration,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, June 3, 2020

Most EU Member States Agree to Terminate Their Intra-EU Bilateral Investment Treaties,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, May 7, 2020

COVID-19: Public Health Emergency Measures and State Defenses in International Investment Law,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, April 28, 2020

U.S. District Court Denies Section 1782 Discovery for Use in DIS Arbitration, Highlighting Deepening Circuit Split on Statute’s Applicability to Private Commercial Arbitrations,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, April 3, 2020

The Impact of Sanctions on Arbitration: A Recent Case Study Involving the EU Sanctions Regime,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, September 16, 2019

Sanctions and Arbitration,” IBA Arbitration Committee newsletter, September 2019

African States Launch the Operational Phase of the African Continental Free Trade Area Agreement,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memorandum, July 31, 2019

Cross-Examination Against the Clock,” Take the Witness: Cross-Examination in International Arbitration,, 2nd edition. Co-authored by Christopher Moore and Richard Kreindler, March 2019

Annulment of UK Award Does Not Entail Removal of Arbitrators When Proceedings are Re-Opened,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, December 17, 2018

The HKIAC Council Approves the 2018 Administered Arbitration Rules,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, October 22, 2018

Competing Priorities in the Fight Against Doping,” Russian Arbitration Association September 2018 Newsletter

Bridgestone Arbitral Tribunal Rules That Trademarks and Trademark Licenses May Constitute Protected Investments,” Oxford Business Law Blog, May 2018

Thorny Questions for IP Rights Under Investment Treaties, Law360, March 14, 2018

European Court of Justice: Investor-State Arbitration Under Intra-EU Bilateral Investment Treaties Is Incompatible With EU Law,” Cleary Gottlieb Alert Memo, March 9, 2018 

“Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements Enters into Force,” Business Law Review, Wolters Kluwer. Co-authored by Christopher Moore, Nathaniel Jedrey and Konrad Rodgers. February 2016