Australia: Turbines tussle may test free trade agreement

Exploring domestic and international options for settlement

The New South Wales Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal by Power Rental Op Co Australia (OpCo) against a decision by the New South Wales Supreme Court which held that the interest in millions of dollars' worth of wind turbines vested in Forge Group Power Pty Ltd (Forge) upon it entering administration due to the operation of the Personal Property Securities Act 2009 (Cth) (PPSA).1

This article considers what steps are now available to OpCo or its parent company, APR Energy PLS (APR), including pathways to investor-state arbitration against the Commonwealth of Australia.


Forge entered into an agreement to lease four mobile gas turbines from General Electric International Inc. (GE) for a fixed-term period. In October 2013, APR bought the business that leased the turbines to Forge. As a consequence, the lease and title of the turbines were subsequently assigned to the two US subsidiaries of APR, OpCo and Power Rental Asset Co Two LLC.

The turbines were subject to a lease when Forge went into voluntary administration in March 2014. At first instance, the court found that the lease for the turbines was a PPS lease under section 13 of the PPSA, which gave rise to a security interest to GE.

Accordingly, Justice Hammerschlag held that because APR had failed to register its security interest under the Personal Property Securities Register (PPSR) the interest in the turbines automatically vested in Forge immediately prior to it entering into voluntary administration.

A recent decision by the NSW Court of Appeal leaves United States interests considering their options for a leasing deal gone wrong.

The recent judgment provided by the Court of Appeal dismissed OpCo's appeal on Justice Hammerschlag's decision and found that:

  1. The definition of 'fixtures' under s10 of the PPSA imported its common law meaning, namely that fixtures are tangible property affixed to the land. The reusable nature of the turbines directed the court to conclude that the turbines could not be deemed as fixtures for the purposes of the PPSA.
  2. The turbines were installed with the intention of removing them after two years. Therefore the primary judge was correct in concluding that the turbines were not fixtures due to the 'temporary nature' of the affixation as per the purposes of the PPSA and its associated common law concepts.

What are APR's options?

Domestic avenues

APR, or related entity OpCo, has applied to the High Court of Australia for special leave to appeal the Court of Appeal decision. The Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) sets out the matters the High Court may take into account when considering whether it will grant special leave to appeal.

These matters include whether the proceedings involve a question of law or are a matter of public importance. Other proceedings that may be granted special leave to appeal include when the High Court is required to resolve differences of opinion between different courts, or within the one court, as to the state of the law and when the interests of justice require the consideration of the High Court.

If special leave to appeal is granted, APR or OpCo will then be able to proceed to have the substance of the appeal heard in the High Court of Australia, Australia's highest court.

If APR is unsuccessful in the High Court, it will have exhausted its legal avenues in the Australian legal system.

International avenues

APR has reportedly brought an action against the Commonwealth of Australia, seeking to rely on the most favoured nation clause in the Australia-United States free trade agreement (AUSFTA) to import the ISDS mechanism from the Australia-Hong Kong bilateral investment treaty (BIT). The Australia-Hong Kong BIT was relied on by Philip Morris Asia Limited (Hong Kong) to bring an action against the Australian Government in respect of Australia's introduction of legislation mandating the plain packaging of tobacco products. This action failed following a preliminary hearing when the tribunal determined that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the claim, as it held that Philip Morris's restructure was for the principle, if not the sole, purpose of gaining protection under the BIT.

The Australian Attorney-General's Department has disputed that APR has any right to bring a claim against Australia and has stated that APR "cannot rely on other agreements in order to create jurisdiction". Australia should follow a similar course to how it conducted the Philip Morris case and apply for a bifurcation of the proceedings to have the question of jurisdiction determined at a preliminary hearing.

If a tribunal finds that it does not have jurisdiction to hear the dispute because APR cannot import the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions of the Australia-Hong Kong BIT, then it will be another victory for the Commonwealth. It should be noted, however, that the Philip Morris arbitration took more than four years for the award on jurisdiction to be made, so it may be some time before we know the outcome of any preliminary hearing in the APR arbitration.

APR would be wise to continue simultaneously pursuing procedural steps available to it to bring an action against Australia under the investment chapter of the AUSFTA. The investment chapter of the AUSFTA is Chapter 11. Article 11.16 of the AUSFTA provides:

"Article 11.16: Consultations on InvestorState Dispute Settlement

  1. If a Party considers that there has been a change in circumstances affecting the settlement of disputes on matters within the scope of this Chapter and that, in light of such change, the Parties should consider allowing an investor of a Party to submit to arbitration with the other Party a claim regarding a matter within the scope of this Chapter, the Party may request consultations with the other Party on the subject, including the development of procedures that may be appropriate. On such a request, the Parties shall promptly enter into consultations with a view towards allowing such a claim and establishing such procedures.
  2. For greater certainty, nothing in this Article prevents a Party from raising any matter arising under this Chapter pursuant to the procedures set out in Chapter 21 (Institutional Arrangements and Dispute Settlement). Nor does anything in this Article prevent an investor of a Party from submitting to arbitration a claim against the other Party to the extent permitted under that Party's law."

There are three separate elements in this provision that need to be considered.

  1. consultations on developing procedures for investor-state dispute settlement
  2. raising the matter pursuant to the procedures set out in Chapter 21
  3. submitting a claim to arbitration to the extent permitted under that party's law.

Upon considering the three elements outlined above, it will become evident why APR is reportedly campaigning the US Government to take action on its behalf. The following analysis is based on the present situation whereby the US would be the party seeking to negotiate the resolution of a dispute arising in respect of Australia. If an Australian investor in the US found itself aggrieved by actions of the US Government, the same procedures would apply in reverse.

  1. Consultations on developing procedure for investor-state dispute settlement

The important distinction between paragraphs 1 and 2 of article 11.16 is that paragraph 1 contemplates a mechanism by which an investor of the US may be able to submit an investment claim to arbitration against Australia. Paragraph 2 on the other hand contemplates options available on a state-to-state level.

It is not, however, a straightforward process and it is apparent that APR cannot commence any action against Australia without US Government intervention.

Firstly, the US Government would need to consider there is a change in circumstances affecting the settlement of investment disputes and in light of such change an investor-state arbitration mechanism should be discussed at the state-to-state level. The guide to the AUSFTA published by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) elaborates by stating the "change in circumstances" relates to the parties' economic and legal environments. Obviously the political environment has recently changed; Trump is now President and the Trump-Turnbull dynamic is reportedly strained. It is probably a stretch to argue that this change in political dynamics constitutes a change in the parties' economic and legal environments sufficient to affect the settlement of investment disputes and that the state parties should consequently consider allowing investor-state arbitration.

APR would have difficulty arguing that the 'expropriation' of its turbines arises from a change of circumstances in Australia's legal environment since it contracted with Forge. The PPSA came into effect in January 2012 which was about 12 months before Forge and GE entered into the lease for the turbines. Accordingly, APR's loss of its security interest in the turbines did not arise from a supervening government act, rather, it is a consequence of GE's, and subsequently APR's, failure to comply with legislation in force at the time of contract.

In any event, even if the US Government could argue that a change in circumstances has occurred, all it would be able to do under paragraph 1 of article 11.16 is request consultations with Australia regarding the "development of procedures that may be appropriate". Even then, there is no requirement in the provision for the parties to reach any definite agreement.

The language of the provision is rather non-mandatory and does not require any particular action by Australia, even if the US requested consultation. Accordingly, unless Australia agreed to engage with the US, paragraph 1 of article 11.16 is not likely to assist APR in bringing an investor-state arbitration against Australia.

  1. Raising the matter pursuant to the procedures set out in Chapter 21

Paragraph 2 of article 11.16 makes it clear that a request for consultations on investorstate dispute settlement under paragraph 1 of the article does not preclude the US Government from raising the matter under Chapter 21 of the AUSFTA, which relates to institutional arrangements and dispute settlement between the state parties. For APR to obtain any assistance under Chapter 21, it would need the US Government to take action on its behalf.

The DFAT guide states that Chapter 21 "establishes a fair, transparent, timely and effective procedure for settling disputes" under the AUSFTA. Importantly, the guide clearly distinguishes Chapter 21 as a mechanism not available for investors to bring an action against Australia but rather a mechanism for the resolution of disputes on the state-to-state level.

Relevantly, Chapter 21 applies to resolve a dispute regarding the interpretation or application of the AUSFTA or where the US considers that Australia has a measure that is inconsistent with its obligations or has failed to carry out its obligations under the AUSFTA.

The stages of dispute settlement under Chapter 21 involve:

  1. The US Government may request consultations to which Australia is expected to reply and enter into in good faith.
  2. If consultations fail to resolve the matter, the dispute may be referred by either party to the AUSFTA Joint Committee which will endeavour to resolve the matter.
  3. If the joint committee fails to resolve the matter, the US may refer the matter to a dispute settlement panel which will prepare and present a report containing its findings and determinations.

If a breach of the AUSFTA is identified in the panel's report, Chapter 21 provides a range of solutions, including requiring Australia to correct the breach or provide trade compensation to the US. If a breach cannot be rectified, Australia may be required to pay a monetary assessment which can be paid into a joint fund to be spent on initiatives which facilitate trade between the two countries. Failure to pay a monetary assessment may result in the suspension of AUSFTA benefits ordinarily conferred on Australia.

As mentioned above, the protections in Chapter 21 would only be of use to APR if it is successful in lobbying the US Government to take action on its behalf.

  1. Submitting a claim to arbitration to the extent permitted under that Party's law

Finally, paragraph 2 of article 11.16 also clarifies that nothing in the article precludes a US investor from submitting an arbitration claim against Australia to the extent permitted under Australian law.

The relevant law is the International Arbitration Act 1974 (Cth) (IAA). Section 32 of the IAA provides that Chapters II to VII of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States have the force of law in Australia.

Chapter II of the convention sets out the jurisdiction of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), which is established by the convention. Article 25 provides that the ICSID shall have jurisdiction over any legal dispute arising out of an investment between a contracting state and a national of another contracting state, in this case between Australia and a national of the US. However, in order for the ICSID to have jurisdiction over the disputed matter, the parties to the dispute must consent in writing to submit the dispute to the ICSID.

In effect, APR is not precluded from having its dispute determined by the ICSID; however it would need Australia's consent in order to do so.

Blocked at every turn?

It seems that APR is attempting to import the ISDS mechanism from the Australia-Hong Kong BIT and ignore the fact that there is no such mechanism in the AUSFTA, as it is clear from the above analysis that direct avenues to bring an action against the Commonwealth of Australia are limited and the assistance of the US Government or the consent of the Australian Government appears to be necessary to enliven any dispute resolution mechanism under the AUSFTA. Given the current political climate, the likelihood of the states collaborating to allow APR to bring an investor-state claim against Australia is probably low.

In the meantime, Australia should move quickly to have the arbitration bifurcated so that the preliminary question of jurisdiction can be determined early, and hopefully nip this claim in the bud.


1Power Rental Op Co Australia, LLC v Forge Group Power Pty Ltd (in liq) (receivers and managers appointed) [2017] NSWCA 8.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


From time to time Mondaq may send you emails promoting Mondaq services including new services. You may opt out of receiving such emails by clicking below.

*** If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of services offered by Mondaq you may opt out by clicking here .


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.