Brújula Home

Institutional repository of the Universidad Loyola

View Item 
  •   Brújula Home
  • PRODUCCIÓN CIENTÍFICA Y TRANSFERENCIA
  • Departamento de Derecho
  • Artículos
  • View Item
  •   Brújula Home
  • PRODUCCIÓN CIENTÍFICA Y TRANSFERENCIA
  • Departamento de Derecho
  • Artículos
  • View Item
    • español
    • English
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Browse

All of BrújulaCommunities and CollectionsAuthorsTitlesKeywordsAuthor profilesThis CollectionAuthorsTitlesKeywords

My Account

Login

Statistics

View Usage Statistics

Añadido Recientemente

Novedades
Repository
How to publish
Visibility
FAQs

Robbing Peter to Pay Paul? ISDS and ICS from an EU Law Perspective

Author:
López Rodríguez, Ana MercedesUniversidad Loyola Authority
URI:
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12412/6597
ISSN:
0902-7351
Date:
2017
Keyword(s):

European Union

Foreign investments

Investor-state dispute settlement mechanism

Investment Court System

Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership

Eu-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement

Treaty on the European Union

Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Abstract:

In 2009 the Treaty of Lisbon conferred upon the European Union the exclusive competence on foreign direct investments (Article 207 TFEU). Following from this new competence the Eu has carried out a comprehensive regulation of trade and investment issues and reforms which include the creation of an International Investment Court, as proposed by the European Commission in both CETA and TTIP negotiations. This article analyses some of the core legal issues of the proposed Court from a European perspective and comes to the conclusion that the same EU constitutional obstacles allegedly posed by ISDS are present in the ics. As a result, the Commission's proposal weakens the perception of ISDS as a fair and legitimate mechanism to deal with investment-state disputes, whereas it perpetuates the existence of an external and parallel mechanism of dispute resolution outside the European court system.

In 2009 the Treaty of Lisbon conferred upon the European Union the exclusive competence on foreign direct investments (Article 207 TFEU). Following from this new competence the Eu has carried out a comprehensive regulation of trade and investment issues and reforms which include the creation of an International Investment Court, as proposed by the European Commission in both CETA and TTIP negotiations. This article analyses some of the core legal issues of the proposed Court from a European perspective and comes to the conclusion that the same EU constitutional obstacles allegedly posed by ISDS are present in the ics. As a result, the Commission's proposal weakens the perception of ISDS as a fair and legitimate mechanism to deal with investment-state disputes, whereas it perpetuates the existence of an external and parallel mechanism of dispute resolution outside the European court system.

Show full item record
Collections
  • Artículos
Files in this item
Thumbnail
6.13.pdf (1.621Mb)
Share
Export to Mendeley
Statistics
Usage statistics
Metrics and citations
Go to Brújula home

Universidad Loyola

Library

Contact

Facebook Loyola BibliotecaTwitter Loyola Biblioteca

The content of the Repository is protected with a Creative Commons license:

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional

Creative Commons Image