Mbalam Nabeba, as an undeveloped large-scale high-grade iron ore mine in Africa, has experienced years of cross-border mining rights disputes. The Paris ICC arbitral tribunal has issued a final ruling, requiring Cameroon to pay $616 million in compensation. This case also provides important reference for Chinese mining investment overseas.

Core process of the case

Australian Sundance Resources holds a mining license for Mbalam iron ore in Cameroon, but the project has been put on hold due to long-term inability to complete financing. In 2022, Cameroon revoked its mining rights and transferred them to local enterprises, disregarding the ICC emergency arbitration interim injunction. The applicant initiates arbitration with an initial claim of 5.5 billion US dollars. In July 2026, the final ruling was made, and the arbitral tribunal found that Cameroon had breached the contract, but rejected most of the expected profit claims and only supported the actual investment losses, with a total compensation of 616 million US dollars. The arbitration in the Nabeba block of Congo, parallel to it, resulted in the rejection of all $8.8 billion claims. Cameroon plans to apply to the Paris Court of Appeal to revoke the ruling. Keywords: Cameroon iron ore arbitration, overseas mining investment risk control

Insights from Overseas Investment

The parties involved in this case are Australian companies and the Cameroonian government. The Chinese party did not participate in the arbitration proceedings and only had historical commercial negotiations. It is necessary to distinguish between overseas Chinese capital and state-owned Chinese enterprises to avoid misjudgment of information. This case highlights the multiple risks of overseas mining investment. The investor should improve the mining agreement terms, attach importance to development time limits and compensation mechanisms, carefully consider the effectiveness of emergency arbitration injunctions, retain complete project investment evidence, design a layered claim plan, and advance the layout of arbitration enforcement plans to cope with the risks of changes in host country resource policies.Editor/Min Jing