ROTTERDAM COURT LIFTS SEIZURE ON SPANISH STATE PROPERTY

The Rotterdam District Court, in its decision dated on 21 July 2026, lifted the seizure that a US investment fund had placed on a property in Utrecht owned by Spain and used by the Instituto Cervantes, in an attempt to enforce a €106.2 million ICSID award arising from Spain’s retroactive reform of its renewable energy feed-in tariff regime.

1.- Under Dutch law, enforcement of a Dutch court order requires prior service of the official authenticated copy (grosses) on the debtor. What the claimant had served on Spain was not a genuine grosse but an unofficial English translation of the enforcement order onto which the court seal and judges’ signatures from the original Dutch decision had been physically copied. The document bore no sworn translator’s stamp, had not been prepared by a certified translator, and was not a certified copy of the court’s decision.

2.- The court applied the customary international law rule codified in Art. 19(c) of the UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities (not yet in force, but reflecting customary law): enforcement against state property is only permissible where the property is specifically in use or intended for use by the State for other than government noncommercial purposes.

3.- Instituto Cervantes is a non-profit public institution established under Spanish Law 7/1991, with the statutory mission of promoting the Spanish language and culture abroad. The revenues from any commercial use flow back to Cervantes and ultimately serve its public mandate.

4.- Spain had notified the award payment to the European Commission as potential state aid. The Commission had not yet issued a final decision. The court noted that it is by no means excluded that the TFEU, as treaty law, takes precedence and may prohibit Spain from paying the award pending Commission clearance. The court declined to issue a general enforcement prohibition, leaving the door open for future enforcement if the state aid issue is resolved.

5.- This decision adds to the growing body of case law on enforcement of intra-EU investment arbitration awards and the limits of sovereign immunity from execution in the context of ICSID awards.