Back to Search
Start Over
Opinion 1/17 in Light of Achmea: Chronicle of an Opinion Foretold?
- Source :
- European Papers, Vol 2019 4, Iss 1, Pp 109-121 (2019)
- Publication Year :
- 2019
- Publisher :
- European Papers (www.europeanpapers.eu), 2019.
-
Abstract
- (Series Information) European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2019 4(1), 109-121 | Article | (Table of Contents) I. Introduction. - II. Achmea's relevance as a precedent for Opinion 1/17. - III. Application of the Achmea test to the CETA tribunal. - IV. Conclusion: an Opinion foretold? | (Abstract) The Achmea judgment of the Court of Justice (judgment of 6 March 2018, case C-284/16 [GC]) indicates that two Member States cannot set up an investor-to-state dispute settlement mechanism via a bilateral investment agreement inter se. Does this imply that the Union cannot set up an international investment tribunal through an agreement with a third State? The Court will rule on this issue in Opinion 1/17, dealing with the compatibility between the Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) and EU Treaties. The present Article suggests that the Court drafted Achmea having Opinion procedure 1/17 in mind. However, the Achmea judgment is ambiguous: the Court implicitly distinguished Achmea from CETA but elaborated a test potentially applicable to all investment tribunals, including the CETA Tribunal, which is at issue in Opinion procedure 1/17. Should the Court apply the Achmea test in Opinion 1/17, the fate of the CETA Tribunal might be all but sealed.
Details
- Language :
- English, Spanish; Castilian, French, Italian
- ISSN :
- 24998249
- Volume :
- 2019 4
- Issue :
- 1
- Database :
- Directory of Open Access Journals
- Journal :
- European Papers
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- edsdoj.6d6d8f13334fef92772875077d1a6e
- Document Type :
- article
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.15166/2499-8249/259