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?
Council of the European Union adopts negotiating directives: EU Commission to negotiate a convention establishing a multilateral investment court
On March 20, 2018, the Council of the European Union adopted negotiating directives authorizing the European Commission to negotiate a convention establishing a multilateral court for the settlement of investment disputes.
On December 8, 2017, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe announced the finalization of the negotiations of the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) between the European Union and Japan.
Beyond advancing its Investment Court System (ICS) proposal in bilateral negotiations, the European Union continues its efforts toward establishing a multilateral investment court (MIC).
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.
On July 31, 2017 the European Commission launched a consultation on the prevention and amicable resolution of disputes between investors and public authorities within the European Union.
After Canada’s ratification of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) on May 17, 2017, Canada and the European Commission agreed to start the provisional application of the agreement on September 21, 2017.
The European Union and Japan announced on July 6, 2017 that they reached an agreement in principle on the main elements of an Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA).
In theory, the common European market works based on principles that protect intra-EU cross-border investments. In practice, can these principles be reconciled with dozens of intra-EU BIT still in place?
In September 2014, the European Commission refused to register a petition signed by over three million EU citizens requesting the Commission to stop trade and investment negotiations with the United States and refrain from concluding the CETA with Canada.
The European Court of Justice published its Opinion 2/15 on the European Union–Singapore FTA on May 16, 2017.
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.
On February 15, 2017, the European Parliament approved the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), signed by Canada and the European Union on October 30, 2016 after seven years of negotiations. The agreement was approved by 408 Members of the European Parliament and rejected by 254, with 33 abstentions. As reported in ITN, this approval paves the […]
On December 13 and 14, 2016, the European Commission and the Canadian Government co-hosted exploratory discussions on establishing a multilateral investment court. Government representatives from several countries attended the closed-door meeting in Geneva. Upon concluding CETA, the two hosts had vowed to “work expeditiously” to create a permanent investment court, building on the ICS mechanism included in the agreement. The goal of […]
Following criticisms of CETA, academics propose reforms in EU trade and investment policy and negotiations
On December 5, 2016, the Belgian region of Wallonia published the Namur Declaration, proposing to change EU trade policy and negotiations. The document was initially signed by 40 academics from several countries, including Paul Magnette, Minister-President of Wallonia. The region made the news in October 2016, when its parliament temporarily blocked the approval of CETA by the Belgian […]
In September, EU officials recognized that the negotiations on the EU–U.S. Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) were unlikely to be concluded before the end of U.S. President Barack Obama’s mandate.
CETA signed; Canada and European Union to “work expeditiously” on creating a Multilateral Investment Court
On October 30, during the 16th European Union–Canada Summit held in Brussels, the two negotiating partners signed the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), after seven years of negotiations.
Brexit and contentious topics complicate TTIP negotiations; public opposition continues
EU negotiation agenda to continue despite Brexit; MERCOSUR and Indonesia at sight
United Kingdom makes trade and investment negotiation moves for post-Brexit era
CETA to be concluded as a mixed agreement; commission hopes for signing in october
RCEP partners conclude 13th negotiating round in auckland; three further rounds in 2016
India takes steps to reform its investment policy framework after approving new model bit
On July 8, 2016, Sajid Javid, former Business Secretary for the United Kingdom, launched preliminary talks with India on a future trade relationship between the two countries as soon as Britain formally leaves the European Union.
On July 5, 2016, the European Commission proposed to the Council that the Canada–European Union CETA—agreed to in 2014 and re-concluded in February 2016—be signed as a “mixed agreement,” requiring signature and ratification by each of the EU member states.
On December 2, 2015, the European Union and Vietnam signed a free trade agreement (FTA), closing three years of negotiations. The text, made public on February 1, 2016, includes the more traditional trade issues, including SPS and TBT, and trade facilitation, but also extends to other issues such as government procurement, competition policy, intellectual property, […]
In a statement issued in early February 2016, the German Association of Judges (known by its German acronym, DRB) firmly rejected the proposal published by the European Commission on September 16, 2015 to establish an Investment Court System (ICS) under the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the European Union and the United States. The DRB […]
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.
All 751 Members of the European Parliament (MEP) will have comprehensive access to all confidential documents relating to TTIP negotiations. The Parliament announced the agreement with the European Commission on December 2, 2015, after 11 months of negotiations. Under the operational arrangements, MEPs will be able to read the restricted “consolidated texts”—which reflect EU and U.S. compromises—in a […]
The 21st century has not been the best of times for U.S. and European workers. They have been buffeted by job losses, underemployment, and economic insecurity. Many individuals toil without benefits or job security. Although workers are increasingly productive, many of them earn less than they did 20 years ago. EU and U.S. policy-makers argue […]