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)

Politico | 4-Jan-2016
The inclusion of an ISDS in an EU agreement could raise the likelihood of such cases being brought against all kinds of public interest and health protecting policies in the future.
El País | 29-Dec-2015
La perdida de protagonismo de los países más pobres, el acceso a los medicamentos o las cláusulas no vinculantes para el desarrollo sostenible son ejemplos de los riesgos que entrañaría para los ODS la construcción de un gran bloque comercial entre Estados Unidos y la Unión Europea.
Inter-Press Service | 29-Dec-2015
The heavily criticized legal mechanism, known as ISDS, is an important tool for European companies to pressurize developing countries. This year Uganda joins the rank of developing nations asking themselves: “Why have we ever signed this?”
http://www.ipsnews.net/2015/12/amer... | 29-Dec-2015
American mining corporation Newmont escaped the domestic processing requirement from Indonesia’s 2009 Mining Law. It achieved this by using a clause in a Dutch investment treaty.
El Diario | 14-Dec-2015
La posición real del PSOE ante los próximos desafíos económicos se vislumbra en sus planteamientos sobre el TTIP, que renuncian a la tradición socialista para volver a abrazar el neoliberalismo.
TNI | 10-Dec-2015
Comment les droits conférés aux entreprises par les accords de libre-échange de l’UE sabotent la transition énergétique.
TNI | 10-Dec-2015
Los derechos especiales para las grandes empresas propuestos en los acuerdos comerciales de la UE impiden la transición energética necesaria para luchar contra el cambio climático, según se desprende de un nuevo informe.
TNI | 10-Dec-2015
Proposed special rights for corporations in EU trade agreements threaten to prevent the necessary energy transition to tackle climate change according to a new report.
Reuters | 10-Dec-2015
Canada is open to rethinking the contentious issue of investor protection in its free trade accord with the European Union but warns that EU demands for change risk unraveling the entire deal.
The Independent | 8-Dec-2015
The European Union has been caught trying to undermine any meaningful outcome from the UN climate talks in Paris.