Yuri Parkhomenko

Partner - Washington, D.C.

Bio photo for Yuri Parkhomenko

Contact Information


Yuri Parkhomenko practices public international law and specializes in representing sovereign States in their disputes with other States or foreign investors.

Yuri acted as counsel in some of the most seminal international law cases before the International Court of Justice and other international tribunals, which resulted in landmark victories both in inter-State disputes (Decolonization of the Chagos Archipelago, Philippines v. China, Bangladesh v. India, Bangladesh v. Myanmar) and investment arbitration (PMI v. Uruguay, Ping An v. Belgium, Gosling v. Mauritius, Aratiri v. Uruguay).

Yuri offers extensive experience in providing advice and advocacy at all stages of international dispute resolution: from strategic advice on an emerging dispute and selection of a dispute settlement body, to formulating claims and defenses, to managing the production of evidence, to acting as advocate during oral hearings.

In inter-State disputes, Yuri has successfully represented States in disputes concerning territorial sovereignty, maritime and land boundary delimitation, self-determination, international responsibility, treaty interpretation, use of force, human rights, humanitarian law and environment.

More »

Education:

  • Harvard Law School, LL.M, 2009
  • The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Master of Arts in Law and Diplomacy, Hargens Scholar, 2008
  • Lund University Law School, Master of Public International Law, 2000
  • Ivan Franko National University of Lviv, Diploma of Specialist (Public International Law), with honors, 1998

Languages:

Ukrainian, Russian, German

Representative Experience

Inter-State litigation and arbitration before the International Court of Justice, International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, and other international tribunals:

  • Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Counsel to The Gambia in the ICJ case against Myanmar to hold it responsible for committing genocide of the Rohingya.  Secured an historic unanimous provisional measures order against Myanmar to protect the Rohingya from genocide.
  • Legal consequences of the separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965. Counsel to Mauritius before the ICJ in case resulting in the advisory opinion, which determined by a vote of 13-1 that the United Kingdom unlawfully detached the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius during its decolonization and must end its unlawful administration of the Chagos Archipelago “as rapidly as possible.”
  • Philippines v. People's Republic of China. Counsel to the Philippines in arbitration under Annex VII of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which resulted in the unanimous award that: (i) held unlawful China’s claim of historic rights to resources within the sea areas falling within the ‘nine-dash line’ in the South China Sea; (ii) determined the legal status of maritime features in the disputed area; and (iii) found China to have breached its international obligations related inter alia to the protection of environment, safety of navigation, and non-aggravation of dispute.
  • Nicaragua v. Colombia. Counsel to Nicaragua in the ICJ case resulting in the resolution of a sovereignty dispute over islands in the Western Caribbean and the delimitation of a maritime boundary in the Caribbean Sea. 
  • Nicaragua v. Colombia. Counsel to Nicaragua in the ICJ case concerning violations of Nicaragua’s sovereign rights in the Nicaraguan maritime zones in the Caribbean Sea.
  • Mauritius/the Maldives. Counsel to Mauritius in case brought under a special agreement before the ITLOS Special Chamber to delimit a maritime boundary in the area between the Chagos Archipelago (Mauritius) and the Maldives.
  • Georgia v. Russia. Counsel to Georgia in the ICJ case brought under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination to hold Russia responsible for ethnic cleansing of Georgians from the areas occupied by Russian following the armed conflict of August 2008. 
  • Mauritius v. the United Kingdom. Counsel to Mauritius in arbitration under Annex VII of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which resulted in the award that the UK breached its international obligations by unilaterally declaring a specific maritime zone around the Chagos Archipelago.
  • Bangladesh v. Myanmar. Counsel to Bangladesh in the ITLOS case delimiting the territorial sea, Exclusive Economic Zone, and continental shelf in the Bay of Bengal.
  • Bangladesh v. India. Counsel to Bangladesh in arbitration Annex VII of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea to delimit the territorial sea, Exclusive Economic Zone, and continental shelf in the Bay of Bengal.
  • Nicaragua v. Colombia. Counsel to Nicaragua in the ICJ case concerning the delimitation of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles in the Caribbean Sea.
  • Ecuador v. Colombia. Counsel to Ecuador in the ICJ case concerning Colombia's aerial spraying of toxic herbicides in close proximity to the Ecuadorian border, causing serious harm to human health, livestock, crops and the environment in Ecuador.
  • Ecuador v. the United States of America. Counsel to Ecuador in State-to-State arbitration under the Ecuador-US bilateral investment treaty concerning the interpretation of the “effective means” clause in the BIT. 
  • Croatia v. Slovenia. (Ad hoc ArbitrationCounsel to the Republic of Croatia in arbitration to delimit land and maritime boundaries.
  • Nicaragua v. Costa Rica. Counsel to Nicaragua in the ICJ case concerning the delimitation of the maritime boundaries in the Caribbean Sea and the Pacific Ocean.
  • Ghana/Cote d’Ivoire. Counsel to Ghana in case  brought under a special agreement before the ITLOS Special Chamber to delimit a maritime boundary in the Gulf of Guinea.
  • Nicaragua v. Costa Rica. Counsel to Nicaragua in the ICJ case concerning pollution of the San Juan River. 
  • Costa Rica v. Nicaragua. Counsel to Nicaragua in the ICJ case concerning environmental harm resulting from the dredging of the San Juan River.
  • Somalia v. Kenya. Counsel to Somalia in the ICJ case concerning delimitation of the maritime boundary in the Indian Ocean.
  • DRC v. Uganda. Counsel to Uganda in the ICJ case concerning the DRC’s war reparation claims for USD 14.5 billion. 

Investor-State Dispute Settlement

  • Philip Morris v. Uruguay (ICSID). Counsel to Uruguay in case brought by tobacco companies challenging Uruguay's regulation of cigarette packaging and health warnings. All claims were dismissed.
  • Ping An Life Insurance Company of China v. Belgium (ICSID). Counsel to Belgium in case involving claims of USD 1 billion, which  brought by Chinese companies challenged Belgium’s financial and banking regulations adopted to address an economic crisis. All claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
  • Gosling v. Mauritius (ICSID). Counsel to Mauritius successfully defending regulations prohibiting the development of a luxury real estate complex in the Le Morne area inscribed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
  • Ritika Mehta, Vinita Agarwal, and Prenay Agarwal v. the Oriental Republic of Uruguay (UNCITRAL arbitration before the PCA). Counsel to Uruguay in arbitration concerning a $4 billion claim by an iron ore mining company. All claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
  • Hydro v. Albania (ICSID). Counsel to Albania in annulment proceedings.
  • European American Investment Bank AG (Austria) v. Slovakia. Counsel to Slovakia in an UNCITRAL arbitration concerning claims arising from modifications in health insurance sector, securing an award in Slovakia’s favor.
  • City State et al. v. Ukraine (ICSID). Counsel to Ukraine in case brought by Dutch investors concerning a dispute arising from measures in the Ukrainian banking and finance sector. 
  • Gold Reserve v. Venezuela (ICSID Additional Facility). Counsel to Venezuela in arbitration concerning a gold concession and environmental rights.
  • Highbury v. Venezuela. Counsel to Venezuela in case concerning gold and diamond concessions, securing an award in Venezuela’s favor. 
  • Vannessa v. Venezuela (ICSID Additional Facility). Counsel to Venezuela in arbitration involving claims for USD 1 billion brought by a Canadian gold mining company following the cancellation of a gold mining contract. All claims were dismissed on the merits.

 

  • Chapter, “Evidence of Environmental Harm,” in INTERNATIONAL COURTS AND TRIBUNALS AND THE PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT (forthcoming in 2022) (eds. S. Mead, B. Samson and E. Sobenes).
  • Book, CANONS OF CONSTRUCTION AND OTHER INTERPRETATIVE PRINCIPLES IN PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW (Co-editor with J. Klingler and C. Salonidis) (2018). 
  • Chapter, “Nicaragua v. United States and Matters of Evidence before the International Court of Justice,” in NICARAGUA BEFORE THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE: IMPACTS ON INTERNATIONAL LAW (2018) (eds. B. Samson and E. Sobenes) (co-author with P.S. Reichler)
  • Chapter, “The Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Nicaragua v. Colombia) and its implications for future maritime delimitations in the Caribbean Sea and Elsewhere,” in NICARAGUA BEFORE THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE: IMPACTS ON INTERNATIONAL LAW (2018) (eds. B. Samson and E. Sobenes) (co-author with L.H. Martin)
  • Article, “Does the Chorzów Factory Standard Apply in Investment Arbitration? Contextual Reappraisal,” THE ICSID REVIEW – FOREIGN INVESTMENT LAW JOURNAL, Volume 32, Issue 2 (1 May 2017), pages 304-325 (co-author with R. Goodman)
  • Article, “International Courts,” THE INTERNATIONAL LAWYER 125 (2010) (co-author with Y. Andreeva, M. Brunetti, R. Goodman, G. Lemenez, C. Pillion and C. Romano)
  • Article,“The Adaptation of States to the Changing World of Investment Protection Through Model BITs,” ICSID Review – Foreign Investment Law Journal, Vol. 24 No.1 (Spring 2009) (Co-worked with M. Clodfelter)
  • Article, “A Case of Equitable Maritime Delimitation: Nicaragua and Colombia in the Western Caribbean Sea,” 2 REVISTA TRIBUNA INTERNACIONAL 3 (2013) (Co-worked with P.S. Reichler).

Honors

  • George B. and Helen J. Hargens Scholar, the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, 2007-2008
  • Award for Outstanding Performance, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, 2005

Involvement

  •  American Society of International Law, Member
  • Speaker, “Psychological considerations in examining and cross-examining witnesses,“ Kiev Arbitration Days, Kyiv, September 2021.
  • Lecturer of a seminar “Practical aspects of litigating law of the sea cases,” George Washington University Law School, Washington, D.C., March 2021.
  • Lecturer on investment arbitration at a training course organized by Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Tokyo, February 2020.
  • Lecturer on inter-State litigation and arbitration at Japan-AALCO Training Course on Public International Law, organized by Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Tokyo, December 2019. 
  • Lecturer at ITLOS-Nippon Foundation Capacity-building and Training Programme on Dispute Settlement under UNCLOS, ITLOS, Hamburg, November 2019. 
  • Lecturer and tutor at the International Boundaries Research Unit (IBRU) workshop on Resolving International Boundary Disputes, Paris, July 2019.
  • Lecturer at ITLOS-Nippon Foundation Capacity-building and Training Programme on Dispute Settlement under UNCLOS, ITLOS, Hamburg, October 2018.
  • Speaker, “Unilateral Appointment of Arbitrators and Ad Hoc Judges,” at the Conference on the Legitimacy of Unseen Actors in International Adjudication, at Leiden University, The Hague, October 2017.
  • Lecturer and tutor at the International Boundaries Research Unit (IBRU) workshop on Islands in Maritime Jurisdiction & Boundary Delimitation, Dubai, November 2016. 
  • Speaker, “Arbitration on the South China Sea: the Tribunal’s awards and their Implications,” George Washington University Law School, September 2016.
  • Speaker, “Conflicts and tensions in investment arbitration: the tobacco cases,” The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, May 2016.
  • Speaker, "Legal Remedies Available to Ukraine under International Law to Protect its Rights violated by the Russian Federation," Ivan Franko National University of Lviv, March 2015.
  • Speaker, "Compliance with jurisdictional preconditions before submitting claims to the International Court of Justice", Seminar on Legal Remedies Available to Ukraine to Protect its Interests in Light of Russia’s Aggression in the Eastern Ukraine and the Annexation of Crimea, the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, Kyiv, December 2014.
  • Speaker, “Investor-State Arbitration and International Commercial Arbitration: Recent Developments and Practical Aspects”, the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, Kyiv, September 2012.