Veintidós Estados miembros de la UE firmaron la declaración política del 15 de enero de 2019, donde anunciaron una serie de acciones sobre los actuales TBI intra-UE y a los arbitrajes de inversión en curso o venideros.
TBI de la UE
Los tratados y capítulos de inversiones actuales y futuros que involucran a los Estados miembros de la Unión Europea o a la propia Unión pueden verse profundamente afectados por una decisión histórica del Tribunal de Justicia Europeo (TJE). En este artículo, el autor examina la decisión desde un punto de vista constitucional de la UE y analiza las posibles consecuencias. ¿Fue la decisión de Achmea una sorpresa para los expertos legales en derecho de la UE?
En teoría, el mercado común europeo funciona basado en los principio que protegen las inversiones transfronterizas intra-UE. En la práctica ¿pueden estos principios ser reconciliados con las decenas de TBIs intra-UE que ya existen?
Tribunal de la CCE desestima demandas entabladas por empresa británica y sus accionistas contra la República Checa
Anglia Auto Accessories Ltd. vs. La República Checa (Caso de la CCE No. V 2014/181) e Ivan Peter Busta and James Peter Busta vs. La República Checa (Caso de la CCE No. V 2015/014)
Over 125,000 complainants requested a temporary injunction against Germany’s approval of the Canada–European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA). While rejecting the request, what concerns did the German Federal Constitutional Court raise with respect to CETA?
CETA signed; Canada and European Union to “work expeditiously” on creating a Multilateral Investment Court
(English) 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.
Foreign direct investment became part of the sphere of exclusive competence of the European Union in 2009. Since then, the European Commission has been negotiating investment treaties with a number of countries—as well as authorized several individual EU member states to negotiate BITs.
(English) 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
(English) Despite the uncertainties in TTIP negotiations, EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström said they would survive Brexit, and is pushing to conclude negotiations before U.S. President Barack Obama leaves office in early 2017.
(English) 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.
India has started to send official notices to terminate bilateral investment treaties (BITs) to 57 partner countries with which it has BITs that have already expired or will expire in the near future. Moreover, to the 25 countries with which India has BITs with initial durations expiring from July 2017 onward, India has started to propose signing joint […]
Did you know that the United Kingdom’s treaty network is twice as consistent as that of Egypt or Pakistan? Have you noticed that 81 per cent of the TPP’s investment chapter is the same as the investment chapter in the U.S.–Colombia FTA, concluded ten years before, in 2006? Treating investment treaty texts as data can equip policy-makers, practitioners and researchers with a more sophisticated understanding of the universe of international investment agreements.
Canada receives investor complaints over provincial energy and environment policies In recent months the government of Canada has received two complaints related to energy and environmental policies adopted by its provinces. Both investors have served Ottawa with notices of intent to submit a claim to arbitration under NAFTA’s investment chapter. A Delaware-based energy firm is […]
Analysis of the European Commission’s Draft Text on Investor-State Dispute Settlement for EU Agreements
With the European Union’s Lisbon Treaty, in force since December 2009, foreign direct investment fell under the exclusive competence of the European Union (EU). Since then the three European institutions—the European Commission, the European Council of Ministers and the European Parliament—have been engaged in a vigorous debate over a new legal framework and negotiating positions […]
While the EU member states insist on the status quo, the European Parliament calls for a reformed European investment policy
The Lisbon Treaty, in force since 1 December 2009, added Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) to the exclusive common commercial policy of the European Union, without foreseeing any transition measures. Today the European institutions are still wrangling over the scope and content of the new EU policy and the status of the more than 1200 existing […]
European Union institutions consider the EU’s future international investment policy Debate on the future of the European Union’s international investment policy is heating up as EU institutions weigh in with their recommendations. With the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty on 1 December 2009, the EU received exclusive competence over foreign direct investment, which […]
Georgia loses dispute with Greek and Israeli oil investors Ioannis Kardassopoulos and Ron Fuchs v. The Republic of Georgia (ICSID Case Nos. ARB/05/18 and ARB/07/15) Martin D. Brauch Two oil traders have been awarded more than US$45 million each in damages from the Republic of Georgia in an ICSID award that advances a broad interpretation […]
With the often costly and far-reaching implications when investors use Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) to adjudicate claims against developing countries, governments in the developing world need powerful arguments to justify that these treaties are in their national interest. One notable contribution to this debate has recently been put forth by political scientists Jennifer Tobin and Mark Busch, who set out to investigate the link between BITs and preferential trade agreements (PTAs). Using statistical techniques, they analyse annual data on pairs of developing and developed countries between 1960 and 2004 and conclude that BITs “raise the prospects of getting a North-South PTA with all the deeper and reciprocal obligations that these entail.”
Ramon Torrent The Lisbon Treaty broadens European commercial policy in what marks the latest milestone in a long (and unfinished) journey in which the EC/EU has sought to extend its exclusive competence over the entire area of external economic relations. Towards this goal, the European Commission has always led the course, albeit with limited success. […]
Reclaiming the public interest in Europe’s international investment policy: Will the future EU BITs be any better than the 1200 existing BITs of EU member states?
The Lisbon Treaty has shifted the competence related to Foreign Direct Investments (FDI) from the European Union Member States to the Union and has added it to the Union’s exclusive common commercial policy. This transfer of competence not only requires the development of a common EU investment policy, but also legislative steps to clarify the status of the 1200 existing Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) of the EU Member States and their ongoing BIT negotiations. This offers a unique opportunity for an assessment of the existing BITs and for an open and broad discussion on the future European international investment policy.
Towards a comprehensive European international investment policy: An interview with Tomas Baert, European Commission, Directorate General for Trade, Services and Investment
With the EU’s Lisbon Treaty granting the European Union competence over Foreign Direct Investment, the European Commission released two documents in July that help chart the way forward: a draft regulation on how to deal with existing Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) of the EU Member States over the next five years, and a Communication that […]
Advocate General renders opinion on Finland’s investment treaties with non-EU countries; Sweden begins compliance with earlier ECJ decision
By Damon Vis-Dunbar 2 October 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 […]
European Court of Justice rules that certain Swedish and Austrian BITs are incompatible with the EC Treaty
(English) 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.
By Damon Vis-Dunbar 10 February 2009 The majority of European Union Member States want to maintain the network of bilateral investment treaties (BITs) that exist between themselves, despite concerns by the European Commission that these treaties have been superseded by European Community law, according to a memo by the EU’s Economic and Financial Committee (EFC). […]
By Damon Vis-Dunbar 17 July 2008 The ECJ advocate general sides with the European Commission in arguing that Austria and Sweden should have amended some of the pre-accession BITs with non-EU countries. In an opinion issued on 10 July 2008, the European Court of Justice’s advocate general argues that provisions guaranteeing the free movement of […]