ISDS改革桌上一席之价——欧洲法院在第1/17号意见中对欧盟投资保护政策的批退及其对欧盟宪法秩序的影响

S. Hindelang
{"title":"ISDS改革桌上一席之价——欧洲法院在第1/17号意见中对欧盟投资保护政策的批退及其对欧盟宪法秩序的影响","authors":"S. Hindelang","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3548204","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The CJEU in Opinion 1/17 concluded that the CETA’s investment provisions are in compliance with the EU Treaties; a decision not just of considerable importance for the Commission’s investment protection policy and reform agenda. It also shows significant consequences for the EU constitutional order. This chapter seeks to explore the said consequences – or the price, so to say – which will come with clearing the way for ISDS in EU agreements in three dimensions. First, the CJEU possibly finding itself more often in judicial conflicts with adjudicative bodies established on the basis of EU agreements, ISDS may sooner or later face its ‘Kadi moment’. Second, by allowing for different standards for reviewing the exercise of sovereign power inside and outside the EU judicial system, Opinion 1/17 gave its blessings to a reshape of the Union’s rule of law. Third, ‘strategic ambiguity’ having been displaced by clarity, the EU unconstitutionality of many EU Member State BITs with third countries as well as of the application of the ECT in disputes with non-EU investors can hardly be denied.","PeriodicalId":401648,"journal":{"name":"European Public Law: EU eJournal","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Price for a Seat at the ISDS Reform Table – CJEU’s Clearance of the EU’s Investment Protection Policy in Opinion 1/17 and Its Impact on the EU Constitutional Order\",\"authors\":\"S. Hindelang\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3548204\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The CJEU in Opinion 1/17 concluded that the CETA’s investment provisions are in compliance with the EU Treaties; a decision not just of considerable importance for the Commission’s investment protection policy and reform agenda. It also shows significant consequences for the EU constitutional order. This chapter seeks to explore the said consequences – or the price, so to say – which will come with clearing the way for ISDS in EU agreements in three dimensions. First, the CJEU possibly finding itself more often in judicial conflicts with adjudicative bodies established on the basis of EU agreements, ISDS may sooner or later face its ‘Kadi moment’. Second, by allowing for different standards for reviewing the exercise of sovereign power inside and outside the EU judicial system, Opinion 1/17 gave its blessings to a reshape of the Union’s rule of law. Third, ‘strategic ambiguity’ having been displaced by clarity, the EU unconstitutionality of many EU Member State BITs with third countries as well as of the application of the ECT in disputes with non-EU investors can hardly be denied.\",\"PeriodicalId\":401648,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Public Law: EU eJournal\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Public Law: EU eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3548204\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Public Law: EU eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3548204","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

欧洲法院在第1/17号意见中得出结论,CETA的投资条款符合欧盟条约;这一决定不仅对欧盟委员会的投资保护政策和改革议程具有相当重要的意义。它还显示出对欧盟宪法秩序的重大影响。本章试图从三个方面探讨上述后果——或者说是代价——为欧盟协议中的ISDS扫清道路所带来的后果。首先,欧洲法院可能会发现自己更经常地与基于欧盟协议建立的裁决机构发生司法冲突,ISDS迟早会面临“卡迪时刻”。其次,通过允许在欧盟司法系统内外审查主权权力行使的不同标准,1/17号意见为重塑欧盟的法治提供了祝福。第三,“战略模糊性”已经被明确性所取代,许多欧盟成员国与第三国的双边投资协定以及在与非欧盟投资者的争端中应用ECT的欧盟违宪性几乎不可否认。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Price for a Seat at the ISDS Reform Table – CJEU’s Clearance of the EU’s Investment Protection Policy in Opinion 1/17 and Its Impact on the EU Constitutional Order
The CJEU in Opinion 1/17 concluded that the CETA’s investment provisions are in compliance with the EU Treaties; a decision not just of considerable importance for the Commission’s investment protection policy and reform agenda. It also shows significant consequences for the EU constitutional order. This chapter seeks to explore the said consequences – or the price, so to say – which will come with clearing the way for ISDS in EU agreements in three dimensions. First, the CJEU possibly finding itself more often in judicial conflicts with adjudicative bodies established on the basis of EU agreements, ISDS may sooner or later face its ‘Kadi moment’. Second, by allowing for different standards for reviewing the exercise of sovereign power inside and outside the EU judicial system, Opinion 1/17 gave its blessings to a reshape of the Union’s rule of law. Third, ‘strategic ambiguity’ having been displaced by clarity, the EU unconstitutionality of many EU Member State BITs with third countries as well as of the application of the ECT in disputes with non-EU investors can hardly be denied.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信