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)

Ecofin | 19-Oct-2017
La firme exploratoire African Petroleum a annoncé avoir déposé auprès du CIRDI les documents relatifs à sa demande d’arbitrage dans le cadre du conflit qui l’oppose au gouvernement gambien.
Reuters | 19-Oct-2017
African Petroleum Corp has begun arbitration proceedings over Gambia’s decision to strip the company of its rights to explore for oil in two offshore areas.
Land Portal | 18-Oct-2017
Tanzania is currently confronting this challenge, faced with a new international investment dispute tied to a proposed large-scale sugarcane and ethanol production project.
Renewables Now | 16-Oct-2017
US clean energy company Invenergy LLC has notified the Polish authorities it plans to turn to international arbitration over its wind investments in the country, if no settlement is reached within six months.
EurActiv | 12-Oct-2017
The European Commission’s plans for a Multilateral Investment Court sanctions a biased and ineffective arbitration system, leaving people and the environment exposed to international investors’ whims.
Sun Daily | 11-Oct-2017
A group of major shareholders in dismantled Russian oil giant Yukos announced they were giving up their efforts to seize lucrative state assets as compensation in France following a series of legal setbacks.
PR Newswire | 6-Oct-2017
Hellenic Republic is found liable towards Hellenic Shipyards for more than 200 million Euros at the ICC while shareholders are pursuing the Hellenic Republic at the ICSID pursuant to the relevant Bilateral Investment Treaty.
PR Newswire | 6-Oct-2017
La CCI condamne la République Grecque à payer à Hellenic Shipyards plus de 200 millions d’euros tandis qu’un arbitrage devant le CIRDI sur la base du Traité bilatéral d’investissement applicable est en cours.
IISD | 4-Oct-2017
Le tribunal a estimé que la société requérante n’avait pas de siège social au Luxembourg et a fait preuve d’abus de droit pour « étayer la réalité de son siège social luxembourgeois »
IISD | 4-Oct-2017
The tribunal ruled that the investor did not have a head office in Luxembourg and had abused its rights to “give the impression that it had a Luxembourg head office”