Chinese Firm Files Arbitration Over Australia's Move to Reclaim Darwin Port
The long-running dispute regarding a Chinese company’s 99-year lease of Australia’s Darwin port took a new turn with Landbridge Group confirming it filed an arbitration claim against the Australian government. The now decade-old lease has become the center of an ongoing politically charged issue, with both the current government and the opposition demanding the port be returned to Australian control.
Landbridge, owned by Chinese billionaire Ye Cheng, who is reported to have ties to the Chinese Communist Party, won the bidding for the lease in 2015 and paid Australia A$506 million (approximately US$375 million based on 2015 exchange rates). At the time, it was a small port, and Landbridge promised investments to revitalize the operations. It was nonetheless a controversial deal that drew political comments and reactions from the United States and others due to the strategic position of Darwin. The government is now calling control of the port a national security issue.
Landbridge asserts it has made the investments helping to grow the operation. In November 2025, it reported more than A$42 million in profit (EBITDA) for the operations. It was an increase of 25 percent over the prior year, and the operators said the port was generating strong net cash flows. They cited the growth in cruise operations and the support of the Barossa offshore gas project.
“Landbridge acquired its interest in the port through a fair, open, and competitive process in full compliance with all applicable Australian laws and regulatory approvals. Multiple Australian Government reviews have confirmed there are no national security concerns,” the company asserted in a statement. “Having engaged with the Commonwealth in an effort to reach a constructive resolution, Landbridge has regrettably been unable to achieve a satisfactory outcome through dialogue alone and is now taking the necessary steps to protect its legal rights.”
The company filed an arbitration claim on April 24 with the World Bank’s International Centre for Settlement of Investor Disputes. It is calling Australia’s actions “discriminatory” and “inconsistent with Australia’s obligations” under the Australia-China Free Trade Agreement (CChAFTA).
The government and the company confirmed they have been in discussions, with both sides calling them “constructive,” but said they have been unable, so far, to achieve a “satisfactory outcome.” There is ongoing political pressure in Australia to wrap up the discussions, with some calling for the government to nationalize the port and cancel the lease.
Landbridge says it “expects” Australia to “refrain from taking any action adverse” to its interests pending resolution of the dispute and consistent with international rules. Experts are highlighting in the Australian media, however, that it could take years for the arbitration to be resolved.
that matters most
Get the latest maritime news delivered to your inbox daily.
Australia’s Transport and Infrastructure Minister Catherine King issued a statement saying the government was “disappointed” by Landbridge’s decision. She said the government would defend the claim while saying they intended to continue the discussions with Landbridge.
This dispute and the actions are very similar to the case between Hong Kong-based CK Hutchison and Panama over the port operations at Balboa and Cristobal. Panama’s Supreme Court ruled the concession to operate the port terminals was unconstitutional, and the government seized the operations. China and the company have also cited the breach of contracts and trade agreements. CK Hutchison has also filed an arbitration seeking more than $2 billion in damages from Panama.
Content Original Link:
" target="_blank">
