AG Wathelet in C-284/16 Achmea: Saving ISDS?

Open Access
Authors
Publication date 08-01-2018
Publisher European Law Blog
Organisations
  • Faculty of Law (FdR) - Amsterdam Center for European Law and Governance (ACELG)
Abstract
A few months ago, AG Wathelet delivered a remarkable defence of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) in international investment agreements between Member States in his Opinion in C-284/16 Achmea. The case concerned a preliminary reference by a German court (the Federal Court of Justice, or Bundesgerichtshof) regarding the validity of an award rendered by an ISDS tribunal under the Dutch-Slovak bilateral investment treaty (BIT). This monetary award against the Slovak government was  the result of the partial reversal of the privatisation of the Slovak health care system. The Opinion is the latest development in the legal controversies surrounding ISDS and EU law after the Micula cases and, of course, the recent Request for an Opinion by Belgium (Opinion 1/17) on the compatibility of CETA with the EU Treaties. Although many aspects of this Opinion merit critical commentary, this post will focus on two issues.
Document type Web publication or website
Note With a correction added on 22 March 2018.
Language English
Published at https://doi.org/10.21428/9885764c.9f8fb4cc
Downloads
sr2fgzx0y41jjk42l8lp1uw6jjehc7ng (Final published version)
Permalink to this page
Back