It is not just about investor-state arbitration: a look at case C-284/16, achmea BV

Gáspár-Szilágyi, Szilard ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7204-406X 2018. It is not just about investor-state arbitration: a look at case C-284/16, achmea BV. European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration 3 (1) , pp. 357-373. 10.15166/2499-8249/220

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

In the much-awaited Achmea judgment (of 6 March 2018, case C-284/16 [GC]), the Court of Justice held that investor-state tribunals (ISTs), “such as” the one under the Netherlands-Slovakia intra-EU bilateral investment treaty (BIT) are incompatible with EU law. In this arguably short judgment, the Court of Justice consolidated its attitude towards the relationship between other international courts and the EU legal order; it set new limits to Art. 344 TFEU; and, it expanded its list of tribunals that do not qualify as Member State courts or tribunals under Art. 267 TFEU. Nonetheless, whilst the Commission can rejoice that it can now clearly oblige Member States to terminate their intra-EU BITs, Achmea sends some worrying signals. The future of ISTs under Member State BITs with third countries is uncertain; so is the viability of the Investment Court System under the agreements with Canada and Vietnam, the future of the Multilateral Investment Court, and the overall coherence of the EU’s international investment law and policy.

Item Type:	Article
Date Type:	Publication
Status:	Published
Schools:	Schools > Cardiff Law & Politics
Publisher:	European Papers
ISSN:	2499-8249
Last Modified:	21 Jan 2026 11:30
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/183502

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item