Current and future investment treaties and chapters involving EU member states or the Union itself may be profoundly impacted by a landmark ruling of the European Court of Justice (ECJ). In this piece, the author explores the judgement from an EU constitutional point of view and analyzes potential consequences. Did the Achmea ruling come as a surprise to EU law insiders?
On September 6, 2017, Belgium submitted to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) a request for an opinion on the compatibility of the ICS with the European Treaties.
Can the European Union act alone in concluding agreements such as CETA and the EU–Singapore FTA? Or must EU member states also ratify them? ECJ Advocate General Sharpston discusses the allocation of powers in the field of investment under EU law.
Legality of investor–state dispute settlement (including in the form of an Investment Court System) in EU trade agreements under EU law is a contentious issue. This article details four legal objections raised by academics and legal experts, and discusses the potential for a legal challenge of ISDS under EU law.
Advocate General renders opinion on Finland’s investment treaties with non-EU countries; Sweden begins compliance with earlier ECJ decision
October 2, 2009 Correction: The original version of this article indicated that the ECJ had rendered a decision in the case Finland. In fact, an Advocate General has issued an opinion, which is not binding on the Court. The article has been revised accordingly. An Advocate General of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) […]
European Court of Justice rules that certain Swedish and Austrian BITs are incompatible with the EC Treaty
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ruled that certain clauses in Sweden and Austria’s bilateral investment treaties are incompatible with the European Community (EC) Treaty.