The Evolution of Substantive Protection in EU International Investment Agreements: Taking Stock of the EU’s Early Treaty-Making Practice

Q2 Social Sciences European Business Law Review Pub Date : 2023-05-01 DOI:10.54648/eulr2023025
Noah A. Barr
{"title":"The Evolution of Substantive Protection in EU International Investment Agreements: Taking Stock of the EU’s Early Treaty-Making Practice","authors":"Noah A. Barr","doi":"10.54648/eulr2023025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article analyses the evolution of substantive investment protection in EU IIAs, i.e., CETA, EUSIPA, EVIPA, the TCA and the proposed CAI. It argues that the overall ‘balancing’ of ‘new-generation’ IIAs has changed. First, these agreements have reduced the scope of investment protection and prioritised market access, investment liberalisation, and investment facilitation by simplifying the transfer of funds and personnel and increasing transparency. Secondly, EU IIAs embrace a limited, yet predictable, approach to investment protection. Non-discrimination standards, NT and MFN, are comprehensively defined, compared to traditional European BITs. Absolute standards of protection, FET and expropriation, entail a balancing exercise in CETA but are missing in the TCA and the Proposed CAI. Investment liberalisation and pre-establishment market access have therefore outstripped post-establishment protection in importance. This approach suggests a re-evaluation by EU policymakers of the relative importance of openness over investor protection. Accordingly, investors should expect limited protection from these agreements.\nInvestment standards, FET, MFN, European Union, CETA, CAI, TCA, Brexit","PeriodicalId":53431,"journal":{"name":"European Business Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Business Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eulr2023025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article analyses the evolution of substantive investment protection in EU IIAs, i.e., CETA, EUSIPA, EVIPA, the TCA and the proposed CAI. It argues that the overall ‘balancing’ of ‘new-generation’ IIAs has changed. First, these agreements have reduced the scope of investment protection and prioritised market access, investment liberalisation, and investment facilitation by simplifying the transfer of funds and personnel and increasing transparency. Secondly, EU IIAs embrace a limited, yet predictable, approach to investment protection. Non-discrimination standards, NT and MFN, are comprehensively defined, compared to traditional European BITs. Absolute standards of protection, FET and expropriation, entail a balancing exercise in CETA but are missing in the TCA and the Proposed CAI. Investment liberalisation and pre-establishment market access have therefore outstripped post-establishment protection in importance. This approach suggests a re-evaluation by EU policymakers of the relative importance of openness over investor protection. Accordingly, investors should expect limited protection from these agreements. Investment standards, FET, MFN, European Union, CETA, CAI, TCA, Brexit
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
欧盟国际投资协定中实质性保护的演变——对欧盟早期条约制定实践的考察
本文分析了欧盟国际投资协定(CETA、EUSIPA、EVIPA、TCA和拟议的CAI)中实质性投资保护的演变。它认为,“新一代”国际投资协定的总体“平衡”已经改变。首先,这些协定缩小了投资保护的范围,通过简化资金和人员的转移以及提高透明度,优先考虑市场准入、投资自由化和投资便利化。其次,欧盟国际投资协定采用了一种有限但可预测的投资保护方式。与传统的欧洲双边投资协定相比,非歧视标准、非关税待遇和最惠国待遇得到了全面界定。保护、场效应效应和征收的绝对标准需要在CETA中进行平衡,但在TCA和拟议的CAI中却没有。因此,投资自由化和建立前的市场准入在重要性上超过了建立后的保护。这种做法表明,欧盟政策制定者重新评估了开放相对于投资者保护的重要性。因此,投资者对这些协议的保护应该有限。投资标准,FET, MFN,欧盟,CETA, CAI, TCA, Brexit
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
European Business Law Review
European Business Law Review Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: The mission of the European Business Law Review is to provide a forum for analysis and discussion of business law, including European Union law and the laws of the Member States and other European countries, as well as legal frameworks and issues in international and comparative contexts. The Review moves freely over the boundaries that divide the law, and covers business law, broadly defined, in public or private law, domestic, European or international law. Our topics of interest include commercial, financial, corporate, private and regulatory laws with a broadly business dimension. The Review offers current, authoritative scholarship on a wide range of issues and developments, featuring contributors providing an international as well as a European perspective. The Review is an invaluable source of current scholarship, information, practical analysis, and expert guidance for all practising lawyers, advisers, and scholars dealing with European business law on a regular basis. The Review has over 25 years established the highest scholarly standards. It distinguishes itself as open-minded, embracing interests that appeal to the scholarly, practitioner and policy-making spheres. It practices strict routines of peer review. The Review imposes no word limit on submissions, subject to the appropriateness of the word length to the subject under discussion.
期刊最新文献
Article: Legislation Comment: Considerations on the Digital Markets Act, the Way to a Fair and Open Digital Environment Article: Open-Price Contracts Under the CISG: The Law in Action Article: EU Law and the Member States’ Competence to Regulate the Operation of Collaborative Economy Platforms – Where Do We Stand after the Digital Services Act Article: The Systemic Importance of Asset Managers: A Case Study for the Future of SIFI Regulation Article: Codes of Conduct in German Employment Relationships – A Measure to Adequately Implementing Compliance and Data Protection?
×
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