The Court of Appeal of England and Wales has dismissed India's appeal, so Ras Al Khaimah Investment Authority (RAKIA) can pursue its treaty claim over a failed aluminium project in Andhra Pradesh. The project collapsed after the state withdrew its bauxite supply.
At a glance
- The UK Court of Appeal upheld a 2025 High Court ruling that lets RAKIA's arbitration claim against India go ahead.
- RAKIA invested about $42.5 million in ANRAK Aluminium, which planned a refinery, smelter and power plant in Andhra Pradesh.
- An arbitral tribunal will now decide whether India breached the India-UAE investment treaty and owes compensation.
Background
Bilateral investment treaties (BITs) let foreign investors sue a country before an international tribunal if they say the state treated their investment unfairly. Bauxite is the ore used to make alumina, which is then smelted into aluminium. A plant without a secure bauxite supply cannot operate, which is why the supply deal sat at the heart of this case.
What happened
The Court of Appeal of England and Wales has ruled against India in a dispute with RAKIA, a United Arab Emirates investment authority, Bar and Bench reported on October 23. Lord Justices Males, Phillips and Miles dismissed India's appeal against a June 2025 High Court judgment. That judgment had overturned an arbitral tribunal's finding that it lacked jurisdiction.
How the dispute began
The case goes back to a 2007 agreement between Andhra Pradesh and Ras Al Khaimah to build an alumina refinery, aluminium smelter and power plant in the state. RAKIA invested about $42.5 million in ANRAK Aluminium, the company set up for the project, and its stake was later diluted to about 12%. The project depended on bauxite from the state-owned Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation (APMDC).
After public protests, the Andhra Pradesh government reversed its position in 2015 and withdrew the orders allowing the bauxite supply. APMDC then terminated the supply agreement, and RAKIA began arbitration in December 2016, alleging unfair treatment and unlawful expropriation.
What the court decided
India argued that RAKIA's protected investment was only its shares in ANRAK, so measures aimed at the project did not directly affect it. The court disagreed, saying the treaty requires investments to be read in their economic context. It held that the state's actions ended the project's main bauxite supply and applied directly to RAKIA's investment.
The ruling does not decide whether India broke the treaty. The tribunal will now hear the merits, including whether India owes RAKIA compensation.
Our read
Outlook: neutral. The ruling concerns a project that never went ahead, so it does not change current aluminium supply or demand.
What to watch
- The arbitral tribunal's hearing on whether India breached the India-UAE treaty.
- Whether India seeks any further appeal of the Court of Appeal's ruling.
For information only, not investment advice.
Aluminium price in India
metalscost.com India reference price as of 2026-11-01.
Detailed analysis
Timeline
- 2026-10-23: Bar and Bench reports the Court of Appeal has dismissed India's appeal in the RAKIA dispute.
Supply Drivers
The case shows how access to bauxite from state-owned miners can decide whether an aluminium project survives.
Government Policies
Andhra Pradesh's 2015 withdrawal of the bauxite supply orders is now being tested under an investment treaty.
What could lift prices
- Legal risk around state bauxite supply could make investors more cautious about new aluminium projects, limiting future supply.
- Projects that depend on state-controlled ore can stall for years, as ANRAK's did after 2015.
What could weigh on prices
- The ruling has no effect on current aluminium output, so it gives no support to prices today.
- Clearer treaty protection could encourage foreign investment in new refining capacity over time.
Country impact
| Country | Impact | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| India | Medium | India now faces a hearing on the merits and possible compensation under the treaty. |
| United Arab Emirates | Low | RAKIA can continue its claim to recover value from its $42.5 million investment. |
Industry impact
| Industry | Effect | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| Aluminium Smelting & Refining | Neutral | The failed project never produced metal, so the ruling does not change industry output. |
Who gains, who loses
- Ras Al Khaimah Investment Authority: It can now argue its case for compensation before the tribunal.
- Government of India: It lost its jurisdiction challenge and must now defend the claim on the merits.
Other ways this could play out
- If the tribunal finds a treaty breach, India could be ordered to compensate RAKIA.
- If the tribunal rules for India on the merits, RAKIA's claim ends without compensation.
Price risks
- Aluminium prices will continue to track global supply and demand rather than this legal case.
- A large award against India could make state governments more careful about withdrawing mining supply deals.
Technical view
Price is mixed relative to its 20-period and 50-period moving averages, showing no clear trend alignment.
Computed from metalscost.com's own stored price history.
India
United Kingdom