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)

In Cyprus | 25-Feb-2017
Greek investors claim that they were discriminated against and lost millions in the bail-in of Cypriot bank deposits some four years and have launched legal action against Cyprus.
Lexology | 23-Feb-2017
The latest award on jurisdiction conflicts with the ruling of a Dutch court which overturned an earlier award of US$50 billion in favour of the former majority shareholders of Yukos.
S2B | 23-Feb-2017
Posición de la red S2B sobre la propuesta de la Comisión Europea relativa a un mecanismo multilateral para la solución de controversias entre inversores y Estados (ISDS)
Akipress | 22-Feb-2017
The Paris Appeals Court annuled $16.5 million award for Latvian businessman Valeri Belokon and reinstated the evidence that Manas Bank employees were engaged in money laundering.
International Economic Law and Policy Blog | 22-Feb-2017
In the transition to its new approach to investor protection, India has sought to terminate its existing BITs with individual EU Members. Now the European Commission is pressuring India to extend those existing treaties.
ISDS Blog | 22-Feb-2017
SCC is a preferred venue for investment arbitrations. Over the past 20 years, the SCC has administered and acted as appointing authority in more than 90 investment arbitrations, both in small-sized and in large-scale disputes.
L’Orient Le Jour | 21-Feb-2017
Une centaine de députés de gauche ont décidé de saisir le Conseil constitutionnel à propos du Ceta qu’il jugent incompatible avec la Constitution française.
S2B | 20-Feb-2017
Globalisation is at a dangerous crossroads. One path leads to regained policy-space for governments to address climate change, inequality and other pressing issues of our times. The other leads to more rights for corporations to bully decision-makers.
International Law Office | 17-Feb-2017
The Svea Court of Appeal rejected the Republic of Kazakhstan’s request to declare invalid or set aside the arbitral award in Stati v Kazakhstan. The judgment cannot be appealed.
No al TTIP | 15-Feb-2017
Los grupos defensores del CETA acusan a quien se opone a él de seguirle el juego a Donald Trump, pero son acuerdos como este los que han contribuido a catapultar al poder a personas como el actual presidente de EEUU.