📖 Reading time: 5 minutes
Sometimes, a legal dispute is more than just a legal dispute.
Sometimes it quietly sketches the outline of a global shift—economic, political, maybe even philosophical. The case between AVZ Minerals and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) over the Manono lithium project might be one of those rare moments when something as technical as a mining permit dispute starts to look like a barometer of broader things: power, control, resource diplomacy, and the long shadow of energy transition politics.
At its core, yes, it’s a contract fight. But like most fights over valuable things, it’s about much more than paper.
The Story So Far: A Mine, a Permit, and a Revocation
In early 2023, AVZ Minerals, an Australian-listed company, lost its right to the Manono lithium project when the DRC government revoked its mining permit. The stated reason? Alleged underperformance or lack of development progress (Reuters, 2025). AVZ had spent years and millions developing the site through a joint venture with local partners. They held a 75% stake via Dathcom Mining SA. The rest was held by Congolese state-owned entities—including Cominière.
Then came the twist: the permit was transferred to a new joint venture involving Zijin Mining, a Chinese-backed company. One might wonder—was this about performance… or preference?
By October 2023, AVZ had filed for arbitration under ICC Rules, asserting breach of contract, indirect expropriation, and denial of justice (Reuters, 2023).
Arbitration as Arena: The Partial Award That Landed
In March 2025, the ICC tribunal issued a partial award, ordering Cominière to pay AVZ €39.1 million for failing to comply with earlier interim measures designed to preserve AVZ’s joint-venture rights (Reuters, 2025).
Not a final ruling, but a milestone. One that quietly reaffirmed: even when a state-linked actor breaches procedural orders, consequences can follow.
It wasn’t just about winning a point in arbitration—it was about gaining leverage. Especially as AVZ began seeking partnerships with U.S. stakeholders keen on securing reliable lithium sources outside China’s orbit (AVZ Minerals, 2025).
Why Lithium? Why Now?
Lithium is no longer a niche mineral. It’s central to electric vehicles, energy storage systems, and arguably, global leverage.
The Manono deposit, one of the largest known hard-rock lithium reserves, sits at the crossroads of geopolitics and resource development (Wikipedia, 2025). Control over its output could shape:
- EV supply chains across the U.S., EU, and Asia;
- Geostrategic alliances, as Western and Chinese actors compete for access;
- DRC’s economic future, balancing national control with foreign capital.
Manono isn’t just a project. It’s a proxy battlefield in the global race to decarbonize.
Law Meets Politics: Where Arbitration Begins to Fray
AVZ claims it exhausted domestic legal channels in the DRC before filing its ICC case. That, in part, underpins its denial of justice argument.
And here lies the tension: in many resource-rich but institutionally fragile states, law and politics are not neatly separate. Sovereign discretion often trumps contractual predictability. AVZ’s allegations—ranging from unlawful permit revocation to state favoritism—paint a picture not unfamiliar to investors in similar settings.
Cases like Tecmed v. Mexico or Occidental v. Ecuador have walked this line before. But AVZ’s route through commercial arbitration, rather than ICSID, gives it a different texture—one focused on contractual enforcement rather than treaty-based rights.
Still, the risks are similar. And so is the message to future investors.
Interim Measures: A Quiet But Forceful Tool
Interim measures often receive less attention than final awards. But they matter. In this case, the tribunal’s order to preserve AVZ’s joint-venture rights was more than symbolic.
When Cominière allegedly breached those terms, the tribunal didn’t hesitate to award damages. That €39.1 million figure now looms as a potential enforcement target—especially in jurisdictions where Cominière holds assets.
The lesson? Even interim steps can carry legal and strategic punch.
May 2025: When Arbitration Paused for Diplomacy
Then came the surprising turn: a negotiated pause.
In May 2025, both sides agreed to suspend proceedings temporarily to explore settlement options. According to AVZ, third-party brokers—potentially U.S. government-linked—were involved (AVZ Minerals, 2025).
It was a revealing moment. Arbitration, often presented as a legal last resort, had become leverage in wider negotiations. A bargaining chip with very real weight.
Enforceability: The Elephant in the Arbitral Room
Even a favorable final award poses challenges.
Can AVZ enforce it? That depends.
Cominière is state-owned. Enforcement may require locating commercial assets abroad, avoiding immunity claims, and navigating public policy exceptions. The New York Convention helps, but it’s not a silver bullet.
The partial award offers precedent—and pressure. Its enforceability may nudge the DRC toward settlement, especially if Western courts recognize and act on the ruling.
But it’s not guaranteed.
What Might Happen Next?
Several outcomes remain on the table:
- Settlement: A revised joint venture involving Western partners or new financing terms.
- Resumed arbitration: If talks collapse, AVZ could request the tribunal to proceed to merits.
- Final award: Addressing expropriation, contractual validity, and compensation.
- Enforcement efforts: In multiple jurisdictions, targeting Cominière’s overseas holdings.
- Precedent-setting ripple effects: Shaping how other investors approach high-risk but high-value mineral plays in Africa.
In short: the case remains live. And the world is watching.
Conclusion
AVZ v. DRC is not just about one company’s fight over a lithium mine. It’s about what happens when the promise of the energy transition collides with the unpredictability of sovereign politics.
The March 2025 partial award marked an inflection point—affirming that even state-owned entities must respect arbitral orders. But resolution will require more than legal doctrine. It will need diplomacy, deal-making, and—perhaps—a bit of realism.
Because in disputes like these, the line between law and leverage is always thinner than it seems.
References
-
AVZ Minerals (2025) ‘Press Release of AVZ Minerals Limited on Temporary Suspension of the Arbitration to Facilitate Settlement Discussions’, 26 May. Available at (Accessed: 1 June 2025).
-
Reuters (2023) ‘Australia’s AVZ Minerals to file arbitration over contested Congo lithium mine’, Reuters, 30 October. Available at (Accessed: 1 June 2025).
-
Reuters (2025) ‘Australia’s AVZ Minerals scores legal victory against Congo over disputed lithium mine’, Reuters, 14 March. Available at (Accessed: 1 June 2025).
-
Wikipedia (2025) Manono-Kitolo mine. Available at (Accessed: 1 June 2025).
-
Jus Mundi (2025) Case summary: AVZ and others v. DR Congo. Available at (Accessed: 1 June 2025).