Investment Arbitration and EU (Competition) Law – Lessons Learned from the Micula Saga

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 330-354
Author(s):  
Alesia Tsiabus ◽  
Guillaume Croisant

On 19 February 2020, in the latest episode to date of the long-running Micula saga, the United Kingdom (UK) Supreme Court gave its green light to the enforcement in the (UK) of the award obtained by the Micula brothers against Romania (Award) under the 2002 Sweden-Romania bilateral investment treaty (BIT), despite the fact that the question of whether this Award constitutes state aid prohibited under EU law was pending before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The Supreme Court ruled that the UK enforcement obligations under the ICSID Convention could not be affected by the EU duty of sincere cooperation, as the UK’s ratification of the ICSID Convention preceded its accession to the EU. The UK Supreme Court judgment, and the prior main episodes of the Micula saga in the framework of the ICSID, EU state aid and enforcement proceedings, offer a great opportunity to explore the increasingly tumultuous relationship between investment arbitration and EU (competition) law, in particular the compatibility of intra- EU investment arbitrations under the ICSID Convention with EU law and the coexistence of selective protections under international investment law with EU state aid law.

De Jure ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Steliyana Zlateva ◽  
◽  
◽  

The Judgement of the United Kingdom’s Supreme Court in the long Micula v. Romania investment treaty dispute confirmed that the arbitral awards of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), rendered by tribunals established under intra-EU BITs, could be enforced in the UK. The Micula case concerns the interplay between the obligations under the ICSID Convention and EU law. In particular, it addresses the question of whether the award obtained by the Micula brothers against Romania constitutes state aid prohibited by EU law, as well as the enforcement obligations under the ICSID Convention in view of the EU duty of sincere cooperation.


Author(s):  
Wijckmans Frank ◽  
Tuytschaever Filip

This chapter explains the term ‘vertical agreements’ and what it covers. It addresses a number of general issues that are relevant to the EU competition law treatment of vertical agreements in general. It describes the implementation and the (public and private) enforcement of Article 101 TFEU before and after the entry into force of Regulation 1/2003. The chapter provides the historical background of both Regulation 330/2010 and Regulation 461/2010. In particular, it devotes specific attention to the nature and legal and practical consequences of soft EU competition law (in the form of notices, guidelines, etc) as opposed to hard EU competition law (provisions of primary and secondary EU law).


2021 ◽  
pp. 1019-1055
Author(s):  
Richard Whish ◽  
David Bailey

This chapter deals with four issues. First it will briefly examine three sectors of the economy that are wholly or partly excluded from EU competition law, namely nuclear energy, military equipment and agriculture; the special regime that once existed for coal and steel products under the former European Coal and Steel Community (‘the ECSC’) Treaty is also mentioned in passing. Secondly, it will explain the application of the EU competition rules apply to the transport sector. Thirdly, the chapter will consider the specific circumstances of four so-called ‘regulated industries’, electronic communications, post, energy and water, where a combination of legislation, regulation and competition law seek to promote competition. Last, but by no means least, the current debate concerning digital platforms is discussed where it is likely that ex ante regulatory rules will be introduced, both in the EU and the UK, to address concerns about anti-competitive conduct and a tendency towards the monopolisation of markets.


Author(s):  
Sandra Marco Colino

This chapter focuses on the current interaction between European Union and UK law. EU law is currently a source of UK law. However, the relationship between the two regimes is expected to change in the future as a consequence of the UK’s decision to withdraw from the EU. The European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 stipulates that the European Communities Act 1972 will be ‘repealed on exit day’, which would be 29 March 2019 provided that the two-year period since Article 50 TEU was triggered is not extended. Once the European Communities Act 1972 has been repealed, EU law will cease to be a source of UK law. No major immediate changes to the national competition legislation are to be expected, but future reforms could distance the UK system from the EU rules.


Author(s):  
Alison Jones

Alison Jones looks at vertical agreements in Chapter 3. This chapter charts the development of UK competition law and policy towards vertical agreements over the 20 years since the Competition Act 1998 came into force. It traces how UK policy has evolved, before examining the UK jurisprudence that assesses the compatibility of vertical agreements with competition law. It notes that although many UK cases initially focused on resale price maintenance, more recently a number have analysed vertical restraints affecting online selling, which have proliferated since 2000 with the rapid growth of e-commerce. The chapter also considers how the law could, or should, develop in the future, especially now the transition period following the UK’s departure from the EU has ended. An important issue considered is whether, post-Brexit, the UK authorities should continue to follow EU competition law in this sphere, which has in significant respects been influenced by internal market considerations, or whether it should take a different course.


2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 78-88
Author(s):  
Noel Beale ◽  
Paschalis Lois

The Trade and Cooperation Agreement broadly sets out the nature of the relationship contemplated between UK and EU competition law and policy following Brexit. The question is whether the UK will capitalize on its newfound discretion to deviate its competition policy from the EU in the future. This article considers some of the potential new directions that might be taken within the UK's competition law landscape, specifically in relation to merger control, antitrust and subsidy control. It explores some of the problems and opportunities created in the wake of Brexit, as well as the legal and practical ramifications of future divergences between UK and EU competition policy. Furthermore, it considers how the Competition and Markets Authority may fare in enforcing new policy, as well as its potential interactions with regimes both within and outside the EU.


EU Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1163-1189
Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter discusses EU law on mergers, first examining the policy reasons underlying merger control. It then considers the jurisdictional, procedural, and substantive aspects to EU merger policy. Jurisdictional issues cover the types of concentration that are subject to the Merger Regulation and the inter-relationship between merger control at EU and national levels. Procedural issues cover matters such as the way in which notice of a proposed merger must be given and the investigative powers possessed by the Commission. Substantive issues of merger policy include matters such as the test for determining whether a merger or concentration should be allowed and the extent to which efficiencies produced by the concentration should be taken into account. The UK version contains a further section analysing issues concerning EU competition law and the UK post-Brexit.


EU Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1122-1147
Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter discusses EU law on mergers, first examining the policy reasons underlying merger control. It then considers the jurisdictional, procedural, and substantive aspects to EU merger policy. Jurisdictional issues cover the types of concentration that are subject to the Merger Regulation and the inter-relationship between merger control at EU and national levels. Procedural issues cover matters such as the way in which notice of a proposed merger must be given and the investigative powers possessed by the Commission. Substantive issues of merger policy include matters such as the test for determining whether a merger or concentration should be allowed and the extent to which efficiencies produced by the concentration should be taken into account. The UK version contains a further section analysing issues concerning EU competition law and the UK post-Brexit.


2010 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 455-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takis Tridimas

AbstractThe judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Kadi is of defining constitutional importance. The Court understood the EU Treaties (at the time, the EC Treaty) as establishing their own constitutional space, asserted the autonomy of EU law vis-à-vis international law and held that responses to emergencies should be handled through, rather than outside, the bounds of the EU Treaties. The judgment is predicated on liberal democratic ideals and views respect for legality as a sine qua non in times of emergency. This chapter seeks to discuss selected case law developments after Kadi. It focuses on the effect of invalidity of sanctions on third parties, issues pertaining to the validity and interpretation of Council Regulation 881/2002/EC, economic sanctions against nuclear proliferation and corresponding developments in the case law of the UK Supreme Court. It does not deal exhaustively with post-Kadi case law. Section I provides a brief introduction to the judgment in Kadi. Section II explores the effect of the ruling on third parties. Section III discusses a selection of recent case law of the Court of Justice and the General Court, and section IV explores in some detail the judgment of the UK Supreme Court in Jabar Ahmed.


2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (91) ◽  
pp. 191-210
Author(s):  
Aleksandar Mojašević ◽  
Stefan Stefanović

The subject matter of this paper are the short-term and long-term consequences of Brexit, a historical event and a turning point in the development of the European Union (EU), as well as for the United Kingdom (UK) and the EU competition law and policy. The article first provides a comparative analysis of the historical development of legal regulation of competition in the UK and the EU, including relevant cases from the practice of competition authorities. In particular, the authors focus on the decisions of the European Commission regarding anti-cartel policy. The article further examines to what extent Brexit will influence the mergers and acquisitions policy, antitrust policy, anti-cartel policy, and state aid policy in the UK and the EU. The central question refers to the extent of Brexit's influence on the change of the UK and the EU business environment, and the repercussions that this change will have for the competition law. In the concluding remarks, the authors discuss the direction of future development of the UK competition law, particularly in terms of whether and to what extent the UK law will be harmonized with the EU competition law and case law in this area, or whether there will be a radical turn towards adopting a completely new concept of competition law and policy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document