The article examines the future of investment arbitration in the EU legal order following the European Court of Justice’s (ECJ) Opinion 1/17, which endorsed the EU’s new Investment Court System (ICS) as compatible with EU law. It reflects on the shift from traditional Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) to the ICS, exploring the implications of this change for EU law and international investment law at large. The article discusses the potential legal consequences of Opinion 1/17, suggesting that ISDS may still be permissible under EU law, but subject to certain conditions aligned with judicial independence.
The future of investment arbitration in the light of Opinion 1/17
Pantaleo, Luca
2020-01-01
Abstract
The article examines the future of investment arbitration in the EU legal order following the European Court of Justice’s (ECJ) Opinion 1/17, which endorsed the EU’s new Investment Court System (ICS) as compatible with EU law. It reflects on the shift from traditional Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) to the ICS, exploring the implications of this change for EU law and international investment law at large. The article discusses the potential legal consequences of Opinion 1/17, suggesting that ISDS may still be permissible under EU law, but subject to certain conditions aligned with judicial independence.
File in questo prodotto:
| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
02_ADR_Pantaleo_FIN.pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia:
versione editoriale (VoR)
Dimensione
196.22 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
196.22 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
