Green Power K/S and SCE Solar Don Benito APS v Kingdom of Spain: How EU Law Allegedly Trumps International Investment Law

N. Lavranos
{"title":"Green Power K/S and SCE Solar Don Benito APS v Kingdom of Spain: How EU Law Allegedly Trumps International Investment Law","authors":"N. Lavranos","doi":"10.1163/24689017_0701010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Green Power arbitral tribunal is the first tribunal ever (and so far, the only one) that accepted the EU law jurisdictional objections raised by an EU Member State. For this reason alone, this decision is historic. Instead of adopting a public international law perspective for determining the question whether it has jurisdiction, the arbitral tribunal adopted an European law perspective and therefore considered itself bound by the CJEU jurisprudence regarding Achmea and Komstroy. With its decision, which came out only a week before the Contracting Parties to the ect concluded their modernisation negotiations in which the EU and its Member States agreed to carve out the arbitration provision for intra-EU ECT disputes, the arbitral tribunal showed that it had a good sense of what was to come in any event. The consequences of all this are that European investors will be stuck with the domestic courts of the Member States and the European Court of Human Rights – with all their limitations.","PeriodicalId":164842,"journal":{"name":"European Investment Law and Arbitration Review Online","volume":"411 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Investment Law and Arbitration Review Online","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24689017_0701010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Green Power arbitral tribunal is the first tribunal ever (and so far, the only one) that accepted the EU law jurisdictional objections raised by an EU Member State. For this reason alone, this decision is historic. Instead of adopting a public international law perspective for determining the question whether it has jurisdiction, the arbitral tribunal adopted an European law perspective and therefore considered itself bound by the CJEU jurisprudence regarding Achmea and Komstroy. With its decision, which came out only a week before the Contracting Parties to the ect concluded their modernisation negotiations in which the EU and its Member States agreed to carve out the arbitration provision for intra-EU ECT disputes, the arbitral tribunal showed that it had a good sense of what was to come in any event. The consequences of all this are that European investors will be stuck with the domestic courts of the Member States and the European Court of Human Rights – with all their limitations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
绿色电力K/S和SCE太阳能Don Benito APS诉西班牙王国:欧盟法律如何据称胜过国际投资法
绿色能源仲裁法庭是有史以来第一个(也是迄今为止唯一一个)接受欧盟成员国提出的欧盟法律管辖权异议的法庭。仅凭这一点,这一决定就具有历史意义。仲裁庭没有采用国际公法的观点来确定其是否具有管辖权的问题,而是采用了欧洲法的观点,因此认为自己受欧洲法院关于阿奇米亚和科姆斯特罗伊的判例的约束。在欧盟及其成员国同意为欧盟内部的ect争端制定仲裁条款的ect缔约方结束其现代化谈判前一周,仲裁法庭做出了这一决定,表明它对无论如何都会发生的事情有很好的认识。所有这一切的后果是,欧洲投资者将受困于成员国的国内法院和欧洲人权法院——尽管它们有种种限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Energy Charter Treaty and the Paris Agreement – Friends or Foes? – 7th EFILA Lecture (28 October 2021) The European Union’s Proposed Amendments to Article 10(1) of the ECT: Advancing or Undermining Its Ambitions for the Green Transition? Going Out of Business: Representing Insolvent Claimants Seeking Investment Treaty Protection in Arbitrations Brought against States (Winner of the Essay Competition 2022) Green Power K/S and SCE Solar Don Benito APS v Kingdom of Spain: How EU Law Allegedly Trumps International Investment Law Does the cjeu Misunderstand Investment Treaty Arbitration in Commission v Micula?
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1