* All international investors involved appeal decision
* Oslo court had ruled against them in September (Adds Infragas, Njord Gas Infrastructure CEO comments)
By Stine Jacobsen
OSLO, Oct 30 (Reuters) - A group of international investorswill appeal against a ruling by an Oslo court regarding Norway'sdecision to cut natural gas pipeline tariffs, a decision theinvestors said would cost them 15 billion crowns ($1.8 billion)in lost earnings by 2028.
Challenging Norway's reputation as a predictable place to dobusiness, four firms owned by funds including Allianz,UBS, the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority and the CanadaPension Plan Investment Board, argued that Norway illegally cutfees on the 8,000-km (5,000-mile) Gassled gas pipeline network.
Solveig Gas, Njord Gas Infrastructure, Silex Gas andInfragas, which hold a combined 45 percent stake in Gassled,were appealing, Solveig Gas said in a statement to the LondonStock Exchange.
Infragas and Njord Gas Infrastructure would continue toinvest in Gassled in accordance with contractual commitments,but could shy away from new investments, their chief executivessaid after the companies publicised their decision to appeal.
Njord Gas Infrastructure said that had the tariffs not beencut, it would probably have bought a stake in the 480-kmPolarled pipeline, whose construction was completed last month.The pipeline connects Statoil's Aasta Hansteen gas field to theNyhamna onshore processing plant.
"There are other projects which typically would have beeninteresting before (the cut in tariffs), for example Polarled,"Njord Gas Infrastructure CEO Birte Norheim told Reuters.
Infragas CEO Knud Noerve said: "When it comes to investmentsoutside of Gassled, it is not something we're looking at for themoment ... That's because of the uncertainty created."
The four firms bought their stakes in 2010 and 2011 fromExxonMobil, Total, Statoil and RoyalDutch Shell.
In September the Oslo district court ruled in favour ofNorway, but said the Oil and Energy Ministry had not providedfull information to the buyers and sellers regarding how thetariffs could be changed.
The court added that the ministry's officials at the timehad been unaware of how easily this could be done.
"The ministry is to blame for this, but following an overallassessment the court concludes that the actions of theministry's leadership can't be regarded as qualifying negligencewhich according to the law is a condition for triggeringliability," the ruling said.
The losing party in a lawsuit in Norway will most often betold to pay the winner's legal fees. In the case of the Gassledlawsuit, however, the government was partly to blame for thefact it had gone to trial, the court said, ruling that theparties should pay their own legal costs.
Norway's Oil and Energy Ministry declined to comment. (Writing by Gwladys Fouche and Stine Jacobsen, editing by TerjeSolsvik and Dale Hudson)