Suchergebnisse

This open access book considers the potential setup for a future Multilateral Investment Court (MIC). The option of an MIC was first discussed by the EU Commission in 2016 and has since been made an official element of the EU Common Commercial Policy. In 2017, UNCITRAL also decided to discuss the possibility of an MIC, and on 20 March 2018, the Council of the EU gave the EU Commission the mandate to negotiate the creation of an MIC. The "feasibility study" presented here is intended to contribute to a broader discussion on the options for a new international court specialized in investment protection. The cornerstones of such a new permanent court are a strict orientation on the rule of law, reduced costs of investment protection, transparency considerations, aspects of consistency in case law, and the effective enforceability of MIC decisions.

Die gemeinsame Handelspolitik (GHP) hat sich seit dem Beginn des europäischen Integrationsprozesses stetig fortent­wickelt, zuletzt erfolgte mit dem Inkrafttreten des Vertrags von Lissabon eine grundlegende Neugestaltung des unionsverfassungsrechtlichen Rahmens der GHP. Der Band befasst sich mit den teils erheblichen Auswirkungen dieser Änderungen in der Rechtspraxis wie in der Gestaltung der Handelspolitik.

Since the beginning of the process of European integration the EU Common Commercial Policy (CCP) has been one of the most dynamic political fields. The EU has achieved a leading role among the economic superpowers and is regarded as a single economic area in which the EU speaks also on behalf of its Member States for most aspects of external economic politics. This volume analyzes the implications of the Treaty of Lisbon for the Common Commercial Policy of the EU. The Lisbon Treaty has declared all matters concerning external commercial policy as exclusive competences of the EU. Which conseque

ABSTRACT
While the investment agreements concluded by the EU have not entered into force, its Member States' bilateral treaties have become a new vehicle to implement EU investment policy in a decentralized fashion. To that end, the EU is planning to use model clauses and interpretative guidelines to be followed by its Member States in their investment agreements. This article argues that this approach has significant benefits but also considerable costs of fragmentation. On the one hand, a decentralized EU investment policy enhances the exportation of EU values, contributes to level the playing field among the Member States, and leads to further integration in that area. On the other hand, the decentralized approach has important downsides: it requires multiple costly treaty (re-)negotiations and the abandonment of the EU's competence-based allocation of international responsibilities. A plurilateral (re-)negotiation is the better approach, with the same benefits but no costs of fragmentation.

The Investment Chapter of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) can be seen as an unofficial blueprint of future EU Investment Agreements and Chapters. It was developed under immense public pressure and had to fulfil multiple conditions resulting from the EU constitutional framework. This contribution highlights the political and juridical background of EU investment policy, and then analyses the most significant new approaches in international investment law - both with regard to substantive standards and investor-State dispute settlement - as exemplified in the CETA. With regard to the substance, it can be witnessed that states are more proactive in defining investment protection standards, leaving less discretion for adjudicators. With regard to dispute settlement, the EU managed to introduce a completely new Investment Court System (ICS) with preselected adjudicators and an appellate mechanism. In light of all these developments, this article argues that we are currently facing a complete change of paradigms in EU investment law, heading towards the EU's long-term goal of establishing a Multilateral Investment Court (MIC).

This open access book considers the potential setup for a future Multilateral Investment Court (MIC). The option of an MIC was first discussed by the EU Commission in 2016 and has since been made an official element of the EU Common Commercial Policy. In 2017, UNCITRAL also decided to discuss the possibility of an MIC, and on 20 March 2018, the Council of the EU gave the EU Commission the mandate to negotiate the creation of an MIC. The "feasibility study" presented here is intended to contribute to a broader discussion on the options for a new international court specialized in investment protection. The cornerstones of such a new permanent court are a strict orientation on the rule of law, reduced costs of investment protection, transparency considerations, aspects of consistency in case law, and the effective enforceability of MIC decisions.