| dc.description.abstract | Since the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon in 2009, the
EU has undertaken the negotiation of a series of trade and
investment agreements with other states, such as Canada, the
United States, Vietnam and Singapore. The inclusion of ISDS
(investor-State dispute settlement) in these agreements
concluded by the EU has raised, in particular, a number of legal
issues and met significant opposition in European civil society.
Following from this, the EU has carried out reforms which
include, inter alia, the creation of an Investment Court System
(ICS). In Opinion 2/2015, concerning the Free Trade Agreement
between the European Union and the Republic of Singapore, the
CJEU has had the opportunity to rule on the competence of the
EU on investment policy and on certain aspects of investor-State
dispute settlement. However, the Court has not yet ruled on the
conformity of ISDS with EU law. This article deals with some of
the certainties and uncertainties regarding ISDS from a
European perspective. Particular attention is paid to whether the
alleged constitutional obstacles posed by ISDS are also present in
the proposed Investment Court System. Ultimately, it attempts
an assessment of the viability of investor-State dispute
settlement in the context of the EU's external action. | es |
