I read the treaty & the Khan case and I admit I struggled initially to see how Aura could succeed as there wasn't any direct expropriation.
But then, after some further research it turns out that the Swedish state owned Vattenfall is suing Germany for 4 billion pounds because the decision to close all nuclear power plants by 2022 "amounted to expropriation".
Germany also rejected as baseless compensation claims by utilities, arguing that its decision to end nuclear power was justified because nuclear risks had changed after the Fukushima meltdown in 2011. It also says a majority of voters back the phasing out of nuclear power.
“Vattenfall [Sweden] is not questioning the decision to phase out nuclear power in Germany. But we insist on receiving compensation for the financial loss suffered by the company,” Kuhberger added.
Thereby it's the Swedish government now, in another case where they are in the same position as Aura, seeking to trigger the treaty.
The risk/reward is white hot here so this is not a plug for Aura, rather a statement of why I believe it is in Sweden's best interests to settle, for both its people who don't want Haagan dug up, and its case against claiming damages from Germany.
Imo
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-...over-nuclear-phase-out-idUKKBN1I91L3[/BCOLOR]
(20min delay)