Header graphic for print
ARBlog International Arbitration News, Trends and Cases

Tag Archives: Investor-state arbitration

CJEU judgment changes landscape for investor-State arbitration in the EU

On 6 March 2018 the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) issued its judgment in Case C-284/16 Slovak Republic v Achmea BV.  The CJEU ruled that investor-State arbitration clauses in investment treaties concluded between EU Member States (“intra-EU investment treaties”) are incompatible with EU law.  Before this landmark judgment of the CJEU, international arbitral tribunals and courts considered such clauses to be compatible with EU law. The underlying case In 2012, Achmea BV, a Dutch Insurer, won a EUR 22 million arbitral award over measures taken by the

The European Parliament Votes to Remove Investor-State Arbitration from the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) Negotiations

On 8 July 2015, the European Parliament voted favorably on a non-binding resolution that approves of the negotiation of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), an international trade and investment agreement between the United States and the European Union. Importantly, however, the resolution also supports the removal of investor-state arbitration from the TTIP. The European Parliament instead recommends to the European Commission negotiators framing the TTIP with their U.S. counterparts that investor-state arbitration be replaced with “a new system for resolving disputes between investors and states which is subject

U.S. Supreme Court decides first case related to international investment treaty arbitration

The United States Supreme Court (the “Court”), on 5 March 2014, issued its first decision in the area of international investment treaty arbitration. The Court, by a 7-2 majority, decided BG Group PLC. v. The Republic of Argentina in favor of BG Group. The Court effectively elected not to second-guess procedural rulings made by investment treaty tribunals. The Court reversed the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit’s ruling that an UNCITRAL tribunal lacked the authority to decide a US$185 million dispute, and instead upheld the tribunal’s award in