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)

Kenyans | 24-Mar-2021
Kenya is set to receive Ksh300 billion after it won a case against Cortec Mining Kenya Ltd, associated with slain businessman Jacob Juma and Stirling Limited for revoking the mining license of niobium and rare earth minerals.
Total Slovenia News | 24-Mar-2021
The British company pursues its investment treaty claim under the UK-Slovenia bilateral investment treaty and the Energy Charter Treaty.
SOMO | 17-Mar-2021
How investment treaties and investor-to-state dispute settlement grant foreign investors greater rights than Dutch and EU law.
El País | 11-Mar-2021
La Cámara de Comercio de Estocolmo falla que no ha vulnerado la Carta de la Energía y obliga a pagar las costas al fondo.
Future Beyond Shell | 11-Mar-2021
To realise a future beyond fossil fuels, it is imperative to look at how to disentangle the legal shackles that enable companies to frustrate climate policy and shift the burden of their stranded assets onto the shoulders of taxpayers through arbitration claims.
Broadband TV News | 11-Mar-2021
Netherlands-based United Group claims that Serbia has violated several obligations related to incentives and mutual protection of investments between the two countries.
CIAR Global | 10-Mar-2021
Las medidas tomadas por España en relación con las primas a las energías renovables fueron “razonables” por lo que no concede ninguna compensación al demandante. Esa es la decisión del tribunal del arbitraje Freif Eurowind Holdings v. España, que, desde 2017, ha sido administrado por el Instituto de Arbitraje de la Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC).
Clarín | 8-Mar-2021
Según las cifras que ahora se han anunciado de manera oficial, Vattenfall recibirá la mayor parte de la compensación, 1.425 millones de euros. Por su parte, se destinarán 880 millones de euros a RWE, 80 millones a EnBW y 42,5 millones a Eon/PreussenElektra.
Bourse Direct | 6-Mar-2021
Les entreprises se sont engagées à retirer toutes les procédures judiciaires en cours, dont le groupe Vattenfall devant un tribunal arbitral de la Banque mondiale.
Reuters | 6-Mar-2021
Vattenfall will get 1.606 billion euros and agreed to end pursuing a separate damages claim in the World Bank’s ICSID arbitration tribunal.