Autonomy and international investment agreements after Opinion 1/17

Publikation: Beiträge in ZeitschriftenZeitschriftenaufsätzeForschungbegutachtet

Standard

Autonomy and international investment agreements after Opinion 1/17. / Kübek, Gesa.

in: Europe and the World: A law review, Jahrgang 4, Nr. 1, 9, 29.09.2020, S. 1-15.

Publikation: Beiträge in ZeitschriftenZeitschriftenaufsätzeForschungbegutachtet

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{88a4254df6ae49eea4251e6566c6d6cf,
title = "Autonomy and international investment agreements after Opinion 1/17",
abstract = "The application and implications of the principle of autonomy for international investment agreements concluded by the Member States and the European Union (EU) has become a recurrent theme before the Court of Justice of the European Union. The decisions in Achmea and Opinion 1/17 show that autonomy unfolds differently in intra- and extra-EU investment relations and can only be preserved in the latter context. The present article examines this difference and, in light of Opinion 1/17, seeks to explain how and why the autonomy of EU law can be preserved for international investment agreements through careful treaty design. In addition, it sheds some light on the practical consequences for the EU{\textquoteright}s and the Member States{\textquoteright} external investment relations",
keywords = "Law, autonomy, investment, CETA, ICS, intra-EU BITs, Achmea, Opinion 1/17",
author = "Gesa K{\"u}bek",
note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2020, Gesa K{\"u}bek.",
year = "2020",
month = sep,
day = "29",
doi = "10.14324/111.444.ewlj.2020.27",
language = "English",
volume = "4",
pages = "1--15",
journal = "Europe and the World: A law review",
issn = "2399-2875",
publisher = "UCL Press",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Autonomy and international investment agreements after Opinion 1/17

AU - Kübek, Gesa

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2020, Gesa Kübek.

PY - 2020/9/29

Y1 - 2020/9/29

N2 - The application and implications of the principle of autonomy for international investment agreements concluded by the Member States and the European Union (EU) has become a recurrent theme before the Court of Justice of the European Union. The decisions in Achmea and Opinion 1/17 show that autonomy unfolds differently in intra- and extra-EU investment relations and can only be preserved in the latter context. The present article examines this difference and, in light of Opinion 1/17, seeks to explain how and why the autonomy of EU law can be preserved for international investment agreements through careful treaty design. In addition, it sheds some light on the practical consequences for the EU’s and the Member States’ external investment relations

AB - The application and implications of the principle of autonomy for international investment agreements concluded by the Member States and the European Union (EU) has become a recurrent theme before the Court of Justice of the European Union. The decisions in Achmea and Opinion 1/17 show that autonomy unfolds differently in intra- and extra-EU investment relations and can only be preserved in the latter context. The present article examines this difference and, in light of Opinion 1/17, seeks to explain how and why the autonomy of EU law can be preserved for international investment agreements through careful treaty design. In addition, it sheds some light on the practical consequences for the EU’s and the Member States’ external investment relations

KW - Law

KW - autonomy

KW - investment

KW - CETA

KW - ICS

KW - intra-EU BITs

KW - Achmea

KW - Opinion 1/17

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85130729137&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.14324/111.444.ewlj.2020.27

DO - 10.14324/111.444.ewlj.2020.27

M3 - Journal articles

VL - 4

SP - 1

EP - 15

JO - Europe and the World: A law review

JF - Europe and the World: A law review

SN - 2399-2875

IS - 1

M1 - 9

ER -

Dokumente

DOI