Europe

European Union (EU) member states have signed over 1300 investment treaties with third countries, in addition to some 200 between EU members. Non-EU European states are party to over 500 treaties. Most of these contain investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions, which enable foreign corporations to take ISDS claims against states if they deem their profits or potential investment to be affected by new laws or changes in policy.

The EU has ratified four agreements with an ISDS mechanism: the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT), to which 53 European and Central Asian countries are party, the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) with Canada, and agreements with Vietnam and Singapore. Only the ECT has been fully in force. The ISDS provisions in the three others will be implemented after all member states have ratified them.

These three deals also include a revised ISDS mechanism created by the European Commission, known as the investment court system. Many critics say that this new system is largely window-dressing and does not address the core of the problem behind investor-state dispute measures.

In 2015, the European Commission asked the EU member states to terminate their intra-EU bilateral investment treaties (BITs), arguing they are incompatible with EU law, which was confirmed by the Court of Justice of the European Union in its “Achmea” decision.

As of April 2020, the number of intra-EU ISDS disputes amounted to 170, approximately 17% of all cases globally, 76 of which having been brought under the ECT.

Overall investors from European countries have initiated over 600 ISDS cases, half of which are against non-European states. European countries have been targeted in about 350 cases. Grouped together, investors from EU member states have launched the majority of total disputes (over 400).

Spain, the Czech Republic, Poland, Russia and Ukraine have been among the ten most frequent respondent states, while the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Germany, Spain, France, Luxembourg, Italy and Switzerland have been among the ten most frequent home states of the investor.

The most well-known cases include:

Yukos (Isle of Man) vs. Russia: US$50 billion awarded in 2014 to majority shareholders of the oil and gas company (ECT invoked).

Eureko (Netherland) vs. Poland: case settled in 2005 for about €2 billion in favour of the investor, a large European insurance company (Netherland-Poland BIT invoked).

Ceskoslovenska Obchodni Banka (Czech Republic) vs. Slovak Republic: €553 million awarded in 2004 to the investor, one of the largest commercial banks in the Czech Republic (Czech Republic-Slovak Republic BIT invoked).

Photo: War on Want

(April 2020)

Natural Gas World | 17-Mar-2022
It now says legislators are amending Slovenia’s mining law to further restrict "all forms of hydraulic stimulation", and this could increase damages it is due under its arbitration claim.
CIAR Global | 16-Mar-2022
El informe por Climate Change Counsel muestra que las cuestiones relativas al cambio climático y a la transición energética han estado ausentes de los laudos arbitrales en el marco del Tratado sobre la Carta de la Energía.
Climate Change Counsel | 15-Mar-2022
In 2021-22, Climate Change Counsel conducted a study of arbitral awards rendered under the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT).
DLA Piper | 11-Mar-2022
Recent reforms in the French solar energy market mean that investors need to take action to protect their investments.
No a los TCI | 10-Mar-2022
Un nuevo análisis del Instituto Internacional para el Desarrollo Sostenible (IISD) alerta de que los compromisos climáticos adoptados en Glasgow corren peligro para los países firmantes del TCE debido a su impacto en las inversiones fósiles.
Arab News | 8-Mar-2022
Le Centre international pour le règlement des différends relatifs aux investissements annonce que «l’arbitrage a repris» dans l’affaire de la BFT.
AFTINET | 7-Mar-2022
AFTINET has raised the alarm over the possibility that British corporations will gain the right to sue the Australian Government if the UK is granted membership in the CPTPP.
Both Ends | 4-Mar-2022
From a climate perspective, the expected reform outcome is a failure. No Contracting Party will end investment protection for fossil fuels in a timeline that is necessary to align with the Paris Agreement.
Le Vif | 28-Feb-2022
Le Traité sur la Charte de l’énergie (TCE) pourrait mettre en échec l’adoption de mesures structurelles ambitieuses de protection sociale visant à contrer la hausse de prix de l’énergie et à protéger les ménages.