Summary

Source: icsid.worldbank.org

On the Non-Disputing Party Application of 4 February 2026

...

II. THE APPLICATION

5. The Second NDP Applicants are four NGOs based in Germany and Switzerland. Their focus is on research and public advocacy regarding matters including climate change and sustainable development/ renewable energy/ decarbonisation. They argue that they can assist the Tribunal with

"...two core issues:

(1) the policy context of the Coal Phase-Out Act, including Germany's climate mitigation measures under the Federal Climate Action Act; and

(2) the policy context of the 2010 Referendum and AET Law in light of Switzerland's climate mitigation duties."

6. The Second NDP Applicants contend that all the requirements of Arbitration Rule 67 are met, meriting the Tribunal exercising its discretion to grant the Second NDP Application.

Specifically:

i. The matters proposed for submission are matters within the scope of the dispute as contemplated in Arbitration Rule 67(2)(a), and the submission would (i) elaborate upon the role played by Germany's mitigation duties (e.g. the 2013-2020 second Kyoto Protocol commitment period) for its compensation scheme, and provide insight into the Act, taking account of the interpretation of international climate law by the International Court of Justice in its Advisory Opinion on Obligations of States in Respect of Climate Change of 23 July 2025; and ii) address the 2010 Referendum and later developments in the context of Switzerland's mitigation duties.

ii. The Second NDP Applicants maintain that their submission would provide perspectives, knowledge or insights different from, or beyond those, of the Parties, as contemplated in Arbitration Rule 67(2)(b). The Second NDP Applicants have a number of subject-matter experts in economics on staff, and possess specific knowledge from the perspective of civil society of the policy choices for the Coal Phase-Out Act as well as the 2010 Referendum and AET Law, which the Second NDP Applicants say will "provide[] unique insight into the context of the decarbonisation efforts of Germany and Switzerland for the Lünen Plant investment that usefully supplements the Parties' pleadings." The Second NDP Applicants also emphasize that their pro bono legal team has relevant experience, and that the proposed submission differs from the written submissions of the First NDPs, who offer a principally scientific perspective, versus the economic and environmental policy perspective that the Second NDP Applicants would bring.

iii. The Second NDP Applicants have a significant interest in the proceeding, as contemplated in Arbitration Rule 67(2)(c), in that they have all been actively involved in policy analysis and engagement, public advocacy and campaigning in the climate change space in Germany and Switzerland. They also have a significant and specific interest with respect to the design of the Coal Phase-Out Act in light of the Federal Climate Action Act alongside the 2010 Referendum and AET Law on the Lünen Plant project in the context of Germany and Switzerland's climate mitigation duties.

iv. The Second NDP Applicants have no direct or indirect affiliation with the Parties (though the German Second NDP Applicants do receive funding from state governments and the federal government of Germany) and are not being provided with financial or other support to file the submission, other than pro bono legal representation, as contemplated in Arbitration Rules 67(2)(d) and (e).

7. The Second NDP Applicants request leave to file a 30-page submission addressing the two key issues identified above (para. 5), filed within 40 days to avoid disruption to the timetable. They do not seek permission to make oral arguments at the hearing.

...

V. ORDER

25. On the basis of the foregoing, the Tribunal DECIDES to reject the Second NDP Application.

...

Footnotes omitted from this introduction