Skip to content

Croatia fights to overturn MOL's control of INA after corruption conviction

A Swiss court will decide if a tainted deal cost Croatia its stake in INA. With talks frozen and legal stakes high, the outcome could reshape energy politics.

The image shows a yellow arnica flower with green leaves in the background, slightly blurred. The...
The image shows a yellow arnica flower with green leaves in the background, slightly blurred. The flower has a bright yellow center and is surrounded by lush green leaves.

Croatia fights to overturn MOL's control of INA after corruption conviction

Croatia is challenging a 2016 arbitration loss to Hungary's MOL over control of their joint oil company, INA. The dispute centres on a 2009 shareholders' agreement, which Zagreb claims is invalid due to a corruption conviction linked to the deal. Negotiations on repurchasing Croatia's stake in INA have now been paused pending the appeal's outcome.

The case stems from a 2016 UNCITRAL arbitration ruling that favoured MOL in a dispute over INA's management rights. Croatia is now appealing that decision through the Swiss Federal Supreme Court, with the filing deadline set for early February. A response from the court is expected by the end of 2022.

The appeal follows a 2022 verdict by the Paris Court of Appeal, where Judge Charles Kaplan upheld a corruption conviction against former Croatian PM Ivo Sanader and MOL CEO Zsolt Hernadi. Zagreb argues that this ruling undermines the legitimacy of the 2009 shareholder agreement, which granted MOL significant control over INA.

MOL maintains that the original agreement remains legally binding. The company insists any changes would require approval from all involved parties. Meanwhile, Croatia has halted talks with MOL on buying back its stake in INA until the appeal is resolved.

The dispute hinges on whether the 2009 agreement can stand after the corruption conviction. If Croatia's appeal succeeds, the shareholder deal could be declared void, altering control over INA. The Swiss court's decision by the end of 2022 will determine the next steps in this long-running legal battle.

Read also: