Background paper on Vattenfall v. Germany arbitration
This paper provides background on an investment dispute between the Swedish energy utility Vattenfall and the Government of Germany pursuant to the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT). Vattenfall is seeking approximately 1.4 billion Euros in compensation from the Government of Germany, claiming that environmental restrictions placed on a coal-fired power plant would make the project uneconomical. In addition to providing background on the dispute, the paper describes the arbitration process under the ECT, a multilateral agreement governing foreign investments in the energy sector. The paper also discusses the ECT's implications for environmental law and policy making.
You might also be interested in
The State of Play in Vattenfall v. Germany II: Leaving the German public in the dark
Two years after Vattenfall brought Germany to international arbitration for a second time (Vattenfall II), the German public is still left out in the dark. This briefing note reviews the background to the case on Germany’s decision to phase out nuclear power and outlines its current state of play.
The German Nuclear Phase-Out Put to the Test in International Investment Arbitration? Background to the new dispute Vattenfall v. Germany (II)
The Swedish energy company Vattenfall has now followed through on its threat to bring an international arbitration claim against Germany in relation to that country's recent decision to phase out nuclear power. Damages claimed by Vattenfall could exceed €700 million.
A Guide for Developing Countries on How to Understand and Adapt to the Global Minimum Tax
This guide for developing countries explains the Global Minimum Tax, Pillar Two of the OECD G20 Inclusive Framework agenda, and discusses options for domestic tax policy responses.
Fair and Equitable Treatment: Why it matters and what can be done
This policy brief presents the different types of FET clauses, the problems associated with its application, and the policy options available to policy-makers to preserve states' right to regulate and avoid ISDS claims.