The present article addresses annulment, recognition and enforcement of investment-treaty awards in the EU, with a particular focus on the procedural issues related thereto. It zooms in on the cohabitation between the international treaties and national arbitration laws applicable to these proceedings and EU law. Following a summary overview of the fundamental differences between the annulment and enforcement regimes of investment-treaty awards under the ICSID regime compared to other international arbitration rules, an analysis is done of the difficulties that can arise when different EU Member State courts are seized of annulment or enforcement proceedings in relation to the same investment-treaty award. In this context, the article looks into two landmark cases (Micula and Achmea) that have spurred the controversies in relation to the validity of so-called “intra-EU” investment-treaty awards. Finally, some salient (international and national) rules on State immunities are discussed, since enforcement proceedings of investor-treaty awards against States naturally raise complex immunity issues.
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your Elgar Online account
-
Front Matter
-
PART I: THE PRE- AND THE POST-AWARD STAGE IN INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION VIS-À-VIS EU LAW AND THE EUROPEAN ATTITUDE TOWARD ANTI-SUIT RELIEF
-
PART II: SELECTED AREAS OF INTERSECTION BETWEEN EU LAW AND INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION
-
PART III: INTERSECTIONS BETWEEN INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT ARBITRATION AND EU LAW
