CK Hutchison warns Maersk off Balboa and Cristobal

In a public update, Hutchison said it had notified the Panamanian state of a treaty dispute and commenced multiple legal steps after last month’s Supreme Court determination that underpinned the long‑running concessions was unconstitutional. The group’s Panamanian unit, Panama Ports Company (PPC), had already started International Chamber of Commerce arbitration on February 3. Hutchison warned that Panama’s moves toward a forced exit and a transition plan were unlawful and lacked operational clarity. 

APM Terminals had moved earlier to temporarily take over the running of the two Panamanian terminals in the wake of the Supreme Court decision.

Hutchison notified Maersk that “any steps by APMT or any of its affiliates to assume the administration or operation of PPC’s ports at Balboa or Cristobal in any capacity for any period of time without the agreement of CKHH will cause damages to CKHH, HPH and PPC and result in legal recourse against APMT and/or its affiliates involved.”

Despite the threats, Hutchison said it remained committed to protecting employees and avoiding disruption – but stressed that continued operation of the terminals “depends solely on actions of the Panama Supreme Court and the Panamanian State,” actions it said were outside Hutchison’s control.

The court ruling has provoked diplomatic and commercial ripples. Beijing warned of “heavy prices” and reportedly ordered state firms to pause new Panama projects, while Chinese customs have stepped up inspections of Panamanian imports.

An opinion piece published in state-run China Daily last week argued the Supreme Court decision was “a textbook case of how external pressure can corrupt judicial independence and undermine the foundations of international investment”.