The case dates back to the Sulu Sultanate’s historical presence in the Philippines and a portion of Sabah, Malaysia.
It centers on an 1878 colonial agreement where the Sultan of Sulu ceded in perpetuity North Borneo (today’s Sabah) to merchants, Messrs Gustavus Baron von Overbeck and Alfred Dent. The merchants agreed to an annual cession payment of RM5,000 to the legitimate heirs of the Sulu Sultanate. In 1903, the cession was affirmed to the British North Borneo Company.
In 1936, Sultan Jamalul Kiram II died and the payment was ceased as the rightful heirs to the Sulu Sultanate could not be determined. In 1936, the High Court of the State of North Borneo identified the heirs of the Sultan of Sulu who were entitled to the cession payment (“the Macaskie Judgement 1939”).
In 1962, Sabah exercised self-determination and joined Malaysia in 1963. The Malaysian Government has never recognized the legitimacy of the self-proclaimed Sultanate of Sulu.
The 1878 agreement, inherited by Malaysia, involved payments to the supposed heirs of Sultan Jamalul Kiram II until 2013.
Payments ceased after a violent armed invasion of Sabah in 2013, ordered by the self-proclaimed Sultan Jamalul Kiram III. The deadly attack, resulting in 78 casualties, prompted Malaysia to terminate payments, taking decisive action against a security threat.
The ‘Royal Sulu Forces’ behind the 2013 armed invasion is now designated a terrorist group by the Malaysian Government, emphasizing the ongoing priority of security in Sabah.
In April 2023, the Malaysian Ministry of Home Affairs classified Fuad A. Kiram as a terrorist for his participation and commission of a terrorist act and close affiliation with the Royal Sulu Forces.
The eight Sulu claimants claim to be the descendants of so-called Sultan Jamalul Kiram II of Sulu, who died in 1936. The Malaysian Government understands that they are all Philippine nationals. However, there is very little information about their identity or their true relation to the Sultan which remains under question. The names of the claimants are:
The claimants receive funding from a global litigation funder, Therium. This means that the eight individuals are financially supported by a well-funded global business that aims to profit from the success of cases in which they invest. This funding covers the legal expenses incurred by the lawyers representing the Sulu claimants in different ongoing proceedings all over the world.
It remains uncertain whether Therium or the Claimants’ legal advisors have conducted due diligence on the true identity of the Sulu Claimants and their connections to the self-proclaimed Sulu Sultanate. Reports indicate that Therium has already invested over $20 million in the claim, anticipating substantial returns from the Government of Malaysia. Malaysia is unaware of whether Therium is directly providing financial support to the Sulu Claimants.
The claimants receive funding from a global litigation funder, Therium. This means that the eight individuals are financially supported by a well-funded global business that aims to profit from the success of cases in which they invest. This funding covers the legal expenses incurred by the lawyers representing the Sulu claimants in different ongoing proceedings all over the world.
It remains uncertain whether Therium or the Claimants’ legal advisors have conducted due diligence on the true identity of the Sulu Claimants and their connections to the self-proclaimed Sulu Sultanate. Reports indicate that Therium has already invested over $20 million in the claim, anticipating substantial returns from the Government of Malaysia. Malaysia is unaware of whether Therium is directly providing financial support to the Sulu Claimants.
On 27 June 2023, Malaysia achieved another significant victory in the Hague Court of Appeal. The court upheld Malaysia’s challenge against the recognition and enforcement in the Netherlands of the alleged Final Award illegitimately issued by Dr. Gonzalo Stampa on 28 February 2022, in Paris.
The Hague court’s decision was unequivocally based on three grounds:
On 9 November 2023, an enforcement judge in Paris officially documented the Claimants’ withdrawal of their request for seizure on three Malaysian-owned diplomatic properties in Paris, linked to the $14.92 billion arbitration dispute. Following the Court of Appeal Decision in June, which upheld the Malaysian government’s challenge against the partial award issued by the arbitrator on 25 May 2020, the withdrawal of the claim against the Paris properties ensued. The judge mandated the Claimants to pay €15,000 to Malaysia as additional costs, in addition to the €100,000 ordered by a Paris Court of Appeal earlier in the year.
On 11 December 2023, Dr. Stampa, the sole arbitrator responsible for issuing the so-called Final Award against the Government of Malaysia, faced a criminal trial in Madrid. He was accused of two crimes: continuing disobedience and aggravated intrusiveness for publicly attributing himself the role of an arbitrator.
In a landmark decision on 22 December 2023, the Madrid Criminal Court sentenced Dr. Stampa to six months imprisonment and a one-year ban from practicing as an arbitrator. This was due to his knowing and blatant disobedience of clear rulings and orders from the Madrid High Court of Justice.
The Madrid Court of Appeal upholds the Madrid Criminal Court judgement of 22 December 2023 that found Dr Gonzalo Stampa guilty for contempt of court. The Madrid Court of Appeal confirms Dr Stampa’s six-month prison sentence and one-year ban from practising as an arbitrator.
Madrid High Court Decision, February 2025: The High Court of Justice of Madrid dismissed the application for annulment that was filed in December2023 by the purported heirs of the Sultanate of Sulu, who challenged the June 2021 decision which nullified the appointment of Gonzalo Stampa as arbitrator in their claim against the Malaysian Government.
The Hague Supreme Court rules in favour Malaysia and has fully dismissed the appeal filed by the so-called heirs of the long-defunct Sultanate of Sulu, who are now the Claimants in the Sulu case. The Supreme Court decision, which is final and binding, brings to an end the Claimants' attempts to enforce their illegitimate claims against Malaysia in the Netherlands.
The French Supreme Court, fully dismisses the challenge filed by the so-called heirs against the decision of the Paris Court of Appeal which had refused to recognise the so-called Partial Award on jurisdiction dated 25 May 2020. The decision means the Partial Award, the initial basis for the Final Award ordering Malaysia to pay USD 15 billion, is not recognised under French law.
The High Court of Justice of Madrid dismissed the application for annulment that was filed in December 2023 by the purported heirs of the Sultanate of Sulu, who challenged the June 2021 decision which nullified the appointment of Gonzalo Stampa as arbitrator in their claim against the Malaysian Government.
On 7 July 2025, the Paris Court of Appeal concluded its hearing on the merits for the annulment of the so-called Final Award in the Sulu case. The Claimants’ motion to delay the proceedings was denied, and the Court reserved its decision to 9 December 2025. Malaysia has expressed full confidence that the decision will mark another decisive step towards ending the Claimants’ unlawful enforcement efforts worldwide.
