Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Det Europeiska Investeringsskyddet i ljuset av Achmea

Pour Assad, Hamid LU (2018) JURM02 20182
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
Investments are per definition subject to risk and uncertainties. In the case of foreign investments, that usually are long-term, it is even more difficult to plan and anticipate potential risks. Bilateral investment treaty (“BIT”) aim to provide foreign investors with protection and a way to deal with risk. Investment protection has given investors an opportunity to better plan their business, without needing to worry for illegal expropriation or discrimination. The ability for investors to claim their rights through neutral arbitration is essential to a BIT. The neutral arbitral tribunal guarantees due process and an effective trial whilst eliminating the political risk.

The relationship between intra-EU BITs and EU law was recently... (More)
Investments are per definition subject to risk and uncertainties. In the case of foreign investments, that usually are long-term, it is even more difficult to plan and anticipate potential risks. Bilateral investment treaty (“BIT”) aim to provide foreign investors with protection and a way to deal with risk. Investment protection has given investors an opportunity to better plan their business, without needing to worry for illegal expropriation or discrimination. The ability for investors to claim their rights through neutral arbitration is essential to a BIT. The neutral arbitral tribunal guarantees due process and an effective trial whilst eliminating the political risk.

The relationship between intra-EU BITs and EU law was recently actualized in the Achmea case. In the case, the European Court of Justice (“CJEU”) settles whether dispute settlement mechanisms established to settle disputes between investors and member states is compatible with EU law. In the opinion of the Advocate General the articles 18, 267 and 344 TFEU should be interpreted in a way that they do not preclude mentioned dispute settlement mechanisms. The CJEU, however, contrary to the opinion of the Attorney General, ruled that article 367 and 344 TFEU shall be interpreted as precluding dispute settlement mechanisms established between investors and member states through intra-EU BITs.

The CJEU ruling on 6 March 2018 has changed the field of investment law in the EU. Investor protection appears to have become limited and rights previously guaranteed to investors through intra-EU BITs can no longer be effectively enforced. The Achmea judgment undoubtedly gives the message that the dispute settlement mechanisms in intra-EU BITS are not allowed. It, however, also clearly states that this does not affect commercial arbitration. At the same time, the judgment leaves a great deal of room for interpretation of what protection an investor can count on and how this would be insured in an effective way. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Investeringar är per automatik behäftade med risker och osäkerheter. För utländska investerare, vars investeringar oftast är långsiktiga, är det dessutom svårare att planera och förutse potentiella risker. Bilaterala investeringsavtal (”BIT”) syftar till att ge utländska investerare skydd och ett sätt att tillvarata detta skydd. Investeringsskyddet har gett investerare bättre möjlighet att planera sin verksamhet, utan oro för exempelvis olovlig expropriation eller diskriminering. Möjligheten att kräva sina rättigheter via en neutral skiljedomstol är en viktig del av ett BIT. Den neutrala skiljedomstolen garanterar en rättssäker och effektiv prövning samtidigt som den eliminerar de politiska riskerna.

I Achmea-fallet aktualiserades... (More)
Investeringar är per automatik behäftade med risker och osäkerheter. För utländska investerare, vars investeringar oftast är långsiktiga, är det dessutom svårare att planera och förutse potentiella risker. Bilaterala investeringsavtal (”BIT”) syftar till att ge utländska investerare skydd och ett sätt att tillvarata detta skydd. Investeringsskyddet har gett investerare bättre möjlighet att planera sin verksamhet, utan oro för exempelvis olovlig expropriation eller diskriminering. Möjligheten att kräva sina rättigheter via en neutral skiljedomstol är en viktig del av ett BIT. Den neutrala skiljedomstolen garanterar en rättssäker och effektiv prövning samtidigt som den eliminerar de politiska riskerna.

I Achmea-fallet aktualiserades relationen mellan intra-EU BITs och EU-rätt. EU-domstolen tar i målet ställning till huruvida tvistlösningsmekanismer som upprättats för att lösa tvister mellan investerare och medlemsstat var förenlig med EU-rätten. Generaladvokaten föreslog i sitt förslag till avgörande att artikel 18, 267 och 344 FEUF ska tolkas så till vida att de inte utgör hinder för nämnda tvistlösningsmekanismer. EU-domstolen dömde, tvärt emot Generaladvokaten, att artikel 267 och 344 FEUF ska tolkas så att de utgör hinder för tvistlösningsmekanismer som upprättats för att lösa tvister mellan investerare och medlemsstat.

EU-domstolens avgörande den 6 mars 2018 har förändrat investeringsrätten i EU. Investerarskyddet förefaller vara inskränkt och rättigheter som investerare tidigare garanterats genom intra-EU BITs går inte längre att på ett effektivt sätt utkräva. Achmea-domen ger otvivelaktiga besked i form av att tvistlösningsmekanismerna i intra-EU BITS inte är tillåtna. Det framgår även tydligt att de kommersiella skiljedomstolarna inte påverkas av beslutet. Domen lämnar samtidigt ett stort utrymme för tolkning av vilka skydd en investerare kan räkna med och hur detta på ett effektivt sätt ska försäkras. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Pour Assad, Hamid LU
supervisor
organization
course
JURM02 20182
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
Achmea, Intra-EU, BIT, Intra-EU BIT, Investeringsrätt, Investeringsskydd, Investeringsavtal, Achmea-domen, Achmea-avgörandet
language
Swedish
id
8965971
date added to LUP
2019-01-28 12:43:02
date last changed
2019-01-28 12:43:02
@misc{8965971,
  abstract     = {{Investments are per definition subject to risk and uncertainties. In the case of foreign investments, that usually are long-term, it is even more difficult to plan and anticipate potential risks. Bilateral investment treaty (“BIT”) aim to provide foreign investors with protection and a way to deal with risk. Investment protection has given investors an opportunity to better plan their business, without needing to worry for illegal expropriation or discrimination. The ability for investors to claim their rights through neutral arbitration is essential to a BIT. The neutral arbitral tribunal guarantees due process and an effective trial whilst eliminating the political risk. 

The relationship between intra-EU BITs and EU law was recently actualized in the Achmea case. In the case, the European Court of Justice (“CJEU”) settles whether dispute settlement mechanisms established to settle disputes between investors and member states is compatible with EU law. In the opinion of the Advocate General the articles 18, 267 and 344 TFEU should be interpreted in a way that they do not preclude mentioned dispute settlement mechanisms. The CJEU, however, contrary to the opinion of the Attorney General, ruled that article 367 and 344 TFEU shall be interpreted as precluding dispute settlement mechanisms established between investors and member states through intra-EU BITs. 

The CJEU ruling on 6 March 2018 has changed the field of investment law in the EU. Investor protection appears to have become limited and rights previously guaranteed to investors through intra-EU BITs can no longer be effectively enforced. The Achmea judgment undoubtedly gives the message that the dispute settlement mechanisms in intra-EU BITS are not allowed. It, however, also clearly states that this does not affect commercial arbitration. At the same time, the judgment leaves a great deal of room for interpretation of what protection an investor can count on and how this would be insured in an effective way.}},
  author       = {{Pour Assad, Hamid}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Det Europeiska Investeringsskyddet i ljuset av Achmea}},
  year         = {{2018}},
}