by Pacôme Ziegler  States walk a tightrope when the protection of the general interest requires encroaching upon private interests, as it often does. Should they fail in this balancing act, effective redress may be available to aggrieved private investors under the applicable investment treaty. Investors do not hesitate to avail themselves of this avenue… Read More Is Portugal’s Huawei Ban Compatible with its Investment Treaty Obligations?
As we return to our offices, hopefully feeling refreshed and recharged after a summer break, it is time to reflect on the last three months of developments in international investment law and arbitrations. The third quarter of this year has been marked by significant changes and noteworthy trends not only vis-à-vis the Energy Charter Treaty… Read More Quarterly Review: July – September 2023
By Agata Daszko On 27 July 2023, Germany’s Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof or BGH) issued a long-awaited decision (I ZB 43/22, I ZB 74/22 and I ZB 75/22) pertaining to intra-EU arbitration on the basis of the Energy Charter Treaty (“ECT”). The decision? “Upstream national legal protection is possible against intra-EU investor-State ICSID arbitral… Read More Germany’s Highest Civil Court Affirms “Primacy of Application of Union Law – Also Vis-à-Vis Public International Law” in Intra-EU Investment Arbitration
By Anastasia Choromidou and Mark Konstantinidis In May 2023, an ICSID ad hoc committee contributed the latest episode to the Spanish solar arbitration saga, by rejecting Spain’s arguments based on the CJEU Komstroy ruling on intra-EU arbitration. The BayWa v Spain annulment decision reflects the tense, from a doctrinal and institutional perspective, relationship between EU… Read More BayWa v Spain: No annulment for old objections
By Stanislava Nedeva The proposal for establishing a Multilateral Investment Court (MIC) has been under discussion for several years now and was taken forward at intergovernmental talks at United Nations Committee on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), with a view of reforming the current investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system. The intergovernmental talks are conducted under the… Read More On the Road to Neutrality: Multilateral Investment Court and Appointment of Adjudicators
By Emma A. Iannini It was not so long ago that many attorneys, academics, and European intellectuals might have described the EU and the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) as one of the crowning achievements of public international law. Despite its self-described sui generis nature, there is no doubt that the EU,… Read More Euroscepticism: A Driver of the EU’s Clash with ISDS and Public International Law?
The Editorial Board of the EFILA Blog is excited to share the first EFILA Blog Quarterly Review! Our editors have gathered and reviewed developments, events and publications from the last quarter of 2022 to highlight some of the most relevant news in the field of international investment law, arbitration and the intersection of ISDS with… Read More Quarterly Review: October – December 2022
By Herbert Woopen In Part I, this post explored and analysed domestic regulations in Italy concerning investment and ECJ’s decisions stemming from those. Now, Part II will look at international law solutions and will analyse how the European Union could and should amend past erroneous decisions. III. The role of International Law where EU Law… Read More Why Komstroy Cannot be the Last Word: more investment into greening the economy requires to bury Achmea, Komstroy, Micula and others (Part II)
I was invited by Alexander Leventhal (Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan) to participate in a webinar conducted by Young ISDS Club on 26 May 2020. Knowing Alexander’s undefined love for discussions on all things in investment arbitration, I was certain that the webinar would be intellectually stimulating. However, to my immediate surprise, it was not like the typical webinar where one could simply sit back and absorb the information. To the contrary, the webinar was interactive and made me think on my feet.… Read More Young ISDS Club – Corona pandemic investment disputes
José Rafael Mata Dona1 As in the previous session of the stakeholder meeting organized by the European Commission (see here), this roundup started with a brief recap of the whole process of the UNICTRAL Working Group III (for a more detailed review of the EU’s proposal for a MIC and ISDS reform under the auspices of UNCITRAL… Read More Stakeholder meeting on a possible future Multilateral Investment Court: Establishment of a Multilateral Investment Court (Brussels, 15 January 2020)
José Rafael Mata Dona A week before the autumn session in Vienna of the UNCITRAL Working Group III, the EC held a Stakeholder meeting in Brussels on the subject of the establishment of a Multilateral Investment Court. The initiative took place as part of the EC Commitment to Transparency. During the introductory speech, Collin Brown (Dispute… Read More Stakeholder meeting on a possible future Multilateral Investment Court: Establishment of a Multilateral Investment Court (Brussels, 9 October 2019)
EFILA has recently submitted its suggestions to the UNCITRAL Working Group no. 3 on ISDS Reform. The entire document can be found here. An extract can be read below. The European Federation for Investment Law and Arbitration (EFILA) believes that no discussion about the reform of the investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) system should occur without… Read More Ensuring Equitable Access to All Stakeholders: Critical Suggestions for the MIC (EFILA Submission to the UNCITRAL WG no. 3 on ISDS Reforms)