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 | 25-Apr-2016
Government ordered to pay compensation after Hugo Chávez nationalised British beef company’s landholdings.
Público | 21-Apr-2016
Bruselas sostiene que su renovado sistema de tribunales privados en el tratado comercial con EEUU garantiza el “derecho a regular” de los estados y asegura que dará menos privilegios a las empresas, pero un estudio al que ‘Público’ ha accedido en primicia desmonta esta versión y analiza casos que podrían volver a darse con este mecanismo.
New York Times | 21-Apr-2016
In a major victory for the Russian government, a Dutch court overturned an award of more than $50 billion to former shareholders of the defunct oil company Yukos.
Sputnik | 21-Apr-2016
Un tribunal de la Haye a reconnu que la Cour d’arbitrage de La Haye, qui a condamné la Russie à verser 50 milliards de dollars aux anciens actionnaires de la compagnie Ioukos, n’avait pas les compétences nécessaires à ces fins.
Amigos de la Tierra | 20-Apr-2016
La nueva propuesta europea perpetuará los ataques de los inversores a la salud y el medio ambiente.
Friends of the Earth | 20-Apr-2016
New EU proposal will perpetuate investors’ attacks on health and environment.
Les Amis de la Terre | 20-Apr-2016
La nouvelle proposition européenne permettra de nouvelles attaques contre la santé et l’environnement.
CES | 20-Apr-2016
Le Comité exécutif et le Congrès de la CES ont clairement refusé l’inclusion dans le PTCI (et l’AECG) de mécanismes étendant aux investisseurs étrangers l’accès à un arbitrage.
Le Temps | 18-Apr-2016
Glencore vient de porter plainte contre la Colombie en vertu d’un accord bilatéral. Alpiq avait fait de même contre la Roumanie en 2014.
Les Echos | 15-Apr-2016
Deux fonds gérés par La Française International ont été lancés pour financer des entreprises qui engagent des poursuites contre un autre groupe ou un Etat.