C Baltag, A Stanič The Future of Investment Treaty Arbitration in the EU, (Kluwer Law International, 2020), ISBN: 9789403512938, €170 (hardback)

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 475-481
Author(s):  
Trisha Mitra
Keyword(s):  
Investment Treaty ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Investment Treaty Arbitration

Adamakopoulos and Others v. Cyprus: “Massive” Problems Concerning a Mass Claims Proceeding in Investment Treaty Arbitration?

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Keer HUANG
Keyword(s):  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Majority Decision ◽  
The Future ◽  
Investment Treaty Arbitration

Abstract The Adamakopoulos and Others v. Cyprus Decision is noteworthy because it provides a blueprint for mass claims proceedings in investment treaty arbitration, justifying the possibility of addressing investment claims en masse in the future. This case comment reviews the background to the dispute, addresses the majority decision on the mass claims, and comments on the Tribunal's reasoning regarding the non-requirement of additional consent to mass claims arbitration, the homogeneity of the claims, and procedural flexibility.

The setting aside and enforcement of intra-EU investment arbitration awards after Achmea

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 253-274
Author(s):  
Julian Scheu ◽  
Petyo Nikolov
Keyword(s):  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Present Contribution ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
European Court ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Energy Charter Treaty ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Investment Treaty Arbitration

Abstract By rendering its preliminary ruling in Achmea v Slovakia, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) declared intra-EU investment treaty arbitration to be incompatible with fundamental principles of the European legal order. This decision does not only illustrate the challenge of regime interaction in international economic law but is also of highest practical relevance. Diverse and critical reactions from arbitral practice and legal scholarship suggest that it will ultimately be up to the courts within and outside of the EU to clarify how the ECJ’s findings in Achmea relate to the legal fate of arbitral awards. Against this background, the aim of the present contribution is to shed light on the judgment’s legal consequences on the post-award phase. As a starting point, an analysis of the judgment finds that the ECJ’s reasoning in Achmea is applicable to investor–State dispute resolution (ISDS) clauses contained in all intra-EU investment treaties, including the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) when applied in an intra-EU context (Section 2). Based on these findings, we evaluate how the incompatibility of intra-EU investment treaty arbitration with the law of the European Union (EU law) affects setting aside proceedings (Section 3) and applications for recognition and enforcement of awards (Section 4) within and outside of the EU. We show that possible solutions may range from fully enforcing intra-EU investment awards to completely disregarding any legal effect. Evaluating the complex legal landscape applicable to both types of proceedings clearly illustrates that there is no simple ‘yes-or-no’ rule. Instead, factors such as the applicability of the ICSID Convention, the seat of the arbitral tribunal or the jurisdiction in which enforcement is sought are relevant but should not be considered in isolation. Instead, it is concluded that these factors must be considered as inter-related aspects of an analytical framework which may lead to a coherent understanding of the relationship between the European legal order and the settlement of intra-EU investment disputes (Section 5).

11 Other Forms of Arbitration and the Future of Arbitration in Korea

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim Joongi
Keyword(s):  
South Korea ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
The South ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Resolution Process ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Dispute Resolution Process ◽  
The Future ◽  
North And South ◽  
Investment Treaty Arbitration

This chapter looks at other forms of arbitration and reflects on the future of arbitration in Korea. In addition to commercial arbitration, other forms of arbitration, particularly investment treaty arbitration, are becoming increasingly important for Korean parties, practitioners, and researchers. Recent efforts to establish a dispute-resolution process through a similar framework between North and South Korea are also discussed. The chapter shows the joint contributions of both sides toward the South–North arbitration efforts. Finally, the chapter notes that while in many regards the future of arbitration in Korea looks bright, despite this outlook, there are still challenges yet to overcome.

Emergency Arbitration

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sim Cameron
Keyword(s):  
Arbitral Tribunal ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
The Future ◽  
Interim Measures ◽  
Emergency Measures ◽  
Investment Treaty Arbitration

Emergency arbitration enables a party to seek urgent relief from an emergency arbitrator during the period required for the constitution of an arbitral tribunal. The procedure is not a substitute for expedited or summary proceedings. It simply enables a party to bypass national courts and obtain pre-tribunal relief in the form of interim measures even before an arbitral tribunal has been formed. The limited mandate of the emergency arbitrator is to determine whether the circumstances warrant urgent relief within the period required for tribunal formation. Studies have revealed that emergency arbitrators have adopted inconsistent approaches to emergency arbitration proceedings. Parties contemplating emergency arbitration are thus faced with uncertainty both as to procedure and prospects, and a lack of clarity as to how to formulate an application for emergency measures. By identifying commonalities between emergency arbitration rules, this book aims to promote greater uniformity in the practice of emergency arbitration, thereby giving parties greater control and certainty in bringing and defending applications for emergency measures. As emergency arbitration rules confer wide discretion on the emergency arbitrator, this uniformity is promoted whilst at the same time recognising, where appropriate, the need for an element of flexibility to be maintained. The book contains seven parts. Part I sets out an overview of emergency arbitration. Parts II to V move through all phases of an emergency arbitration, starting with pre-commencement considerations and ending with enforcement. Part VI is dedicated to emergency arbitration in investment treaty arbitration. Finally, in Part VII, the future of emergency arbitration is explored.

scholarly journals Remarks by Emi Nagaoka

2018 ◽  
Vol 112 ◽  
pp. 67-67
Author(s):  
Emi Nagaoka
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Investment Liberalization ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
The Future ◽  
Investment Agreement ◽  
The Absolute ◽  
The Eu

When it comes to the investment agreement (IA) between Japan and the EU or the EU member states, which means not only the investment part of the JEEPA but also the new investment treaty that would be concluded in the future, it is not considered that Japan and the EU have reached agreement without the absolute standards of treatment (e.g. FET and expropriation). Indeed, the text of the investment part of the JEEPA presented on the European Commission's website, which has not been legally verified yet as of today (April 5, 2018), has not stipulated said absolute standards, and such investment part is even titled as “Investment Liberalization” implying that only the non-discrimination provisions are provided. However, from the viewpoint of promoting investment as well as protecting the investors in the other countries, the level of liberalizing investment should not be decreased nor should the coverage of the standard or treatment be limited. In particular, FET is the most important standard of treatment for investors and most of them have relied on FET as their legal basis where they submit claims in the ISDS procedure. It is apparent that most countries also take the absolute standards important and necessary and the recent IAs including the CPTPP containing the absolute standards are considered to comply with such countries’ perspective.

From Lena Goldfields to Crystallex: A Proposal For Collective Financing Of Sovereign Award Debt

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 549-576
Author(s):  
Ruth Teitelbaum
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Investors ◽  
Arbitral Award ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
The Future ◽  
Investment Treaty Arbitration

Abstract The Lena Goldfields payment story must be recognized for upholding a critical principle: the notion that an arbitral award debt is a collective problem between sovereigns. The stories of payment in Lena Goldfields and Crystallex lead to the following inquiry: why should today’s system of investment treaty arbitration, based upon treaties providing for reciprocal obligations between sovereigns, treat the payment of arbitral awards as a one-sided obligation of only one sovereign, to be borne alone? If sovereigns are able to enter into treaties providing for mutual protections and benefits, including the mutual consent to arbitrate future investment disputes with foreign investors, why should they not also be able to collectively insure the future payment of awards owed to foreign investors in the future?

Conference Reports

2005 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 223-234
Author(s):  
Edin Mujagic ◽  
Dóra Győrffy ◽  
László Jankovics
Keyword(s):  
Economic Policy ◽  
European Association ◽  
Policy Research ◽  
Conference Report ◽  
Annual Conference ◽  
Summer Institute ◽  
The West ◽  
The Future ◽  
Economic Studies ◽  
The Eu

EMU Enlargement to the East and the West CEPR/ESI Conference. Report of the 8th annual conference of the Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR) and the European Summer Institute (ESI) held in September 2004 in Budapest, Hungary. (Conference report by Edin Mujagic); Dilemmas around the future enlargement of the EU-EACES Conference. The European Association for Comparative Economic Studies (EACES) held its 8th biannual conference at the Faculty of Economics in Belgrade on September 23-25, 2004. (Conference report by Dóra Gyõrffy and László Jankovics)

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document