Céline Greenberg advises and represents clients in complex international disputes, particularly in the energy, infrastructure, post-M&A and distribution sectors.
Her clients have included multinational corporations, states / state-owned entities en entrepreneurs. They choose *Céline* for her ability to quickly grasp the essence of a case and develop a strategy that is rigorous and creative, tailored to the tribunal that will decide the matter.
Over the course of her career, Céline has acted in dozens of arbitrations, under the ICC, ICSID, LCIA, UNCITRAL and Swiss rules, governed by a variety of substantive laws (including French, English, Swiss, Algerian and OHADA law). She has been involved in the smallest cases to the biggest ones, including the largest case in ICC history at the time (US$ 77 billion at stake in the oil and gas sector), in which she acted as tribunal secretary.
Her approach to advocacy is structured and compelling: she builds clear narratives, grounded in legal precision and supported by carefully curated evidence. Her strong verbal and written communication skills — in both English and French — are combined with a natural ability to connect with clients and arbitrators alike. She understands that persuasion is not just about logic, but also about timing, tone, and empathy.
Creativity in practice
Winning a bet-the-company case presented as a lost cause
Challenge: Client was facing a 50M euros claim. Client believedt hat, based on the contract, the commission was due. An award granting the claim would have caused Client’s bankruptcy.
Solution: Through detailed witness examination and research into the history of similar contracts concluded by Client, we acquired a deeper understanding of industry practices, shining a new light on this contracts' terms.
Outcome: The tribunal accepted Céline's analysis, dismissing the claim and protecting Client from financial disaster.
1
Opening access to arbitral justice to impecunious claimants
Challenge: A group of claimants with strong legal claims was unable to afford the costs of arbitration, risking denial of justice. The financials of the case excluded eligibility for third party funding.
Solution: Céline developed a legal strategy to make the respondent bear the full advance on arbitration costs, contrary to long-standing and universal practice that the advance is shared between the parties or fully paid by the claimant.
Outcome: Two tribunals ruled in Clients’ favour, ordering the respondent to finance the arbitration, allowing Clients to pursue their claims.
2