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)

The Guardian | 4-Nov-2021
Treaty allows energy corporations to sue governments for billions over policies that could hurt their profits.
In-Cyprus | 4-Nov-2021
The arbitration has been discontinued in response to the non-payment of the claimant’s portion of the required advance payment of the costs of the proceeding.
Interfax | 3-Nov-2021
SREW N.V., an open joint-stock company registered in Belgium, which owns 75% of the charter capital of Dnipro-Buzka wind plant LLC, has initiated arbitration against Ukraine.
Le Soir | 2-Nov-2021
Au fur et à mesure que des tribunaux arbitraux ont condamné des Etats à verser des sommes astronomiques à des investisseurs lésés, le recours à l’ISDS a commencé à être décrié.
Bloomberg | 29-Oct-2021
Coal plant owners are using this little-known mechanism to try and recoup billions from governments who are forcing them to shut down polluting plants
Kluwer Arbitration Blog | 29-Oct-2021
Meanwhile, the European Commission is working on a legislative initiative aiming at improving the protections offered to intra-EU investment under EU law.
Global Justice Now | 28-Oct-2021
Courts allow big polluters to sue governments into “a state of climate paralysis”, campaigners say.
Attac | 28-Oct-2021
Une nouvelle publication révèle que cinq entreprises de l’énergie poursuivent des États pour leur politique climatique en leur réclamant 18 milliards de dollars de compensation.
CIAR Global | 27-Oct-2021
El juez nacional estará obligado a anular el laudo dictado sobre un acuerdo de arbitraje celebrado ad hoc que infringe el Derecho de la Unión. Concluye la nota emitida por el Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea sobre la Sentencia en un procedimiento entre la sociedad luxemburguesa PL Holdings y Polonia.
TNI | 26-Oct-2021
En los últimos 10 años el Estado español ha recibido más demandas de arbitraje de inversión que cualquier otro Estado. Con 50 casos en total, es hoy el segundo país en el mundo con más demandas en tribunales arbitrales internacionales.