International and European Law Problems of Investment Arbitration involving the EU

Dr. Peter Ratz

doi:10.5771/9783845286327

Zusammenfassung

Mit dieser Arbeit legt der Autor die erste monographische Behandlung der Frage vor, inwiefern völker- und europarechtliche Probleme dazu führen, dass Schiedsverfahren nach von der EU abgeschlossenen Investitionsschutzabkommen einen geringeren Schutzstandard gewähren als „reguläre“ BITs.

Der Autor gelangt zu dem Ergebnis, dass Schiedsverfahren nach EU-Investitionsschutzabkommen tatsächlich einen niedrigeren Schutzstandard gewähren.

Dies hängt mit Problemen der Vollstreckung von Schiedssprüchen und Unterschieden hinsichtlich der materiellen Verpflichtungen der EU und der Mitgliedstaaten zusammen, die zu Schutzlücken für Investoren führen. Der wichtigste Faktor ist allerdings die Rechtunsicherheit, die daraus resultiert, dass die in bisher von der EU abgeschlossenen Investitionsschutzabkommen enthaltenen Streitbeilegungsregeln nicht den Vorgaben des EuGH entsprechen.

Publikation durchsuchen

Bibliographische Angaben

Copyrightjahr: 2017
Erscheinungsdatum: 29.09.2017
ISBN-Print: 978-3-8487-4415-2
ISBN-Online: 978-3-8452-8632-7
Verlag: Nomos, Baden-Baden
Reihe: Schriften zur Europäischen Integration und Internationalen Wirtschaftsordnung
Band: 41
Sprache: Deutsch
Seiten: 470
Produkttyp: Monographie

Inhaltsverzeichnis

KapitelSeiten

Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis Kein Zugriff Seiten 1 - 28
1. 1.1 Relevance of the research topic Kein Zugriff
2. 1. 1.2.1 Definition of the research question Kein Zugriff
  2. 1. 1.2.2.1 “Investment agreement” Kein Zugriff
    2. 1.2.2.2 “Implementation”, “compliance”, “enforcement” and “execution” Kein Zugriff
3. 1.3 Envisaged course of the analysis Kein Zugriff
4. 1.4 Envisaged style of the analysis Kein Zugriff
1. 1. 2.1.1 Customary international law and investment law Kein Zugriff
  2. 1. 2.1.2.1 The principle of “equal sovereignty” Kein Zugriff
    2. 2.1.2.2 The “consent theory” Kein Zugriff
    3. 2.1.2.3 Relevant case-law Kein Zugriff
    4. 2.1.2.4 General principles of law Kein Zugriff
    5. 2.1.2.5 The “succession argument” Kein Zugriff
    6. 2.1.2.6 Arguments based on art. 24 of the UN Charter, the emergence of customary rules on privileges of international organizations and the international legal personality of the EU Kein Zugriff
    7. 2.1.2.7 International organizations as second-rate subjects of international law Kein Zugriff
    8. 2.1.2.8 The concept of “estoppel” Kein Zugriff
    9. 2.1.2.9 Result Kein Zugriff
2. 1. 2.2.1 The (prevailing) view that all parties to a mixed agreement are bound by all provisions of the agreement Kein Zugriff
  2. 2.2.2 The view that not all parties to a mixed agreement are bound by all provisions of the agreement Kein Zugriff
  3. 1. 2.2.3.1 The “procedural approach” and the EC declaration to the ECT Kein Zugriff
3. 2.3 Excursus: Responsibility of EU Member States for non-compliance of other Member States with their obligations under mixed agreements Kein Zugriff
1. 3.1 Focus on the ILC draft articles on the responsibility of international organizations Kein Zugriff
2. 1. 1. 3.2.1.1 International organizations assisting or directing member states in wrongful acts Kein Zugriff
    2. 3.2.1.2 Double attributability Kein Zugriff
  2. 3.2.2 The “institutional link” and the “territorial link” Kein Zugriff
  3. 1. 3.2.3.1 Case-law based on the control criterion Kein Zugriff
    2. 1. 3.2.3.2.1 The “transfer of control” theory Kein Zugriff
    3. 3.2.3.3 From the “transfer of control” theory to the member states’ or the international organization’s institutional responsibility? Kein Zugriff
3. 3.3 EU responsibility for the conduct of EU organs Kein Zugriff
4. 1. 1. 3.4.1.1 Member State organs as EU organs? Voices in the literature Kein Zugriff
    2. 3.4.1.2 Relevant case law Kein Zugriff
    3. 3.4.1.3 ILC draft articles Kein Zugriff
    4. 3.4.1.4 Result Kein Zugriff
  2. 3.4.2 EU responsibility for the “incorrect” implementation of EU legislation by Member States Kein Zugriff
  3. 3.4.3 EU responsibility for the enactment and implementation of legislation by EU Member States when EU legislation grants discretion to the Member States concerning its implementation Kein Zugriff
  4. 3.4.4 EU responsibility for the enactment and implementation of legislation by EU Member States when there is no relevant EU legislation Kein Zugriff
  5. 1. 3.4.5.1 The substantive provisions of the Financial Responsibility Regulation Kein Zugriff
    2. 3.4.5.2 The Financial Responsibility Regulation and the autonomy of the EU legal order Kein Zugriff
5. 1. 3.5.1 The hierarchy between international law and EU law from an international law perspective Kein Zugriff
  2. 1. 1. 3.5.2.1.1 Preliminary result Kein Zugriff
      2. 3.5.2.1.2.1 Kadi: Case summary Kein Zugriff
        3.5.2.1.2.2 Kadi and Solange: Analysis Kein Zugriff
      3. 3.5.2.1.3 The position of international law in the EU legal order after Kadi Kein Zugriff
    2. 3.5.2.2 Obligations of the EU Member States Kein Zugriff
  3. 1. 3.5.3.1 How should Member States deal with arbitral awards that find Member States to have violated international law in order to comply with EU law? Kein Zugriff
6. 3.6 The EU, but not Member States being bound by international law – responsibility gap 2? Kein Zugriff
1. 1. 4.1.1 State-to-state dispute settlement mechanisms Kein Zugriff
  2. 4.1.2 Investor-to-state dispute settlement mechanisms Kein Zugriff
2. 1. 1. 4.2.1.1 Explanations for the shift of EU preferences from political to legalistic dispute settlement Kein Zugriff
  2. 4.2.2 Three types of relevant EU agreements: trade and association agreements, ECT and full-fledged investment agreements Kein Zugriff
  3. 1. 1. 4.2.3.1.1 Historical development Kein Zugriff
    2. 1. 4.2.3.2.1 Singapore Kein Zugriff
      2. 4.2.3.2.2 CETA Kein Zugriff
    3. 4.2.3.3 State-to-state dispute settlement mechanisms under the ECT Kein Zugriff
    4. 4.2.3.4 Duty of cooperation as a limitation to the right to initiate SSDS? Kein Zugriff
  4. 1. 1. 4.2.4.1.1 Availability of state-to-state dispute settlement mechanisms? Kein Zugriff
      2. 4.2.4.1.2 Exercise of diplomatic protection? Kein Zugriff
      3. 4.2.4.1.3 Having recourse to courts? Kein Zugriff
    2. 1. 4.2.4.2.1 Availability of arbitration fora Kein Zugriff
      2. 4.2.4.2.2 Singapore Kein Zugriff
      3. 4.2.4.2.3 CETA Kein Zugriff
    3. 1. 4.2.4.3.1 EU cases under the ECT – why have no claims been brought against the EU under the ECT? Kein Zugriff
      2. 4.2.4.3.2 Admissibility of claims of EU investors against the EU? Kein Zugriff
      3. 4.2.4.3.3 Alleged unlawful conduct Kein Zugriff
      4. 4.2.4.3.4 Availability of arbitration fora Kein Zugriff
      5. 4.2.4.3.5 Tactical reasons Kein Zugriff
3. 1. 1. 4.3.1.1 SSDS in “classical” BITs vs SSDS in the ECT Kein Zugriff
    2. 4.3.1.2 SSDS in “classical” BITs vs SSDS in EU trade and association agreements Kein Zugriff
    3. 4.3.1.3 SSDS in “classical” BITs vs SSDS in full-fledged EU IIAs Kein Zugriff
  2. 1. 4.3.2.1 ISDS in “classical” BITs vs ISDS in the ECT Kein Zugriff
    2. 1. 4.3.2.2.1 Singapore Kein Zugriff
      2. 4.3.2.2.2 CETA Kein Zugriff
      3. 4.3.2.2.3 Result Kein Zugriff
4. 1. 1. 4.4.1.1 Pre-CETA: A genuinely European (EU) approach or a general trend? Kein Zugriff
    2. 4.4.1.2 The EU-CETA approach to investor-to-state dispute settlement Kein Zugriff
  2. 1. 4.4.2.1 Criticism against ISDS Kein Zugriff
    2. 4.4.2.2 Driving force behind the pre-CETA EU approach to ISDS Kein Zugriff
    3. 1. 4.4.2.3.1 Could the pre-CETA approach have done the trick? Kein Zugriff
      2. 4.4.2.3.2 Will the EU-CETA approach do the trick? Kein Zugriff
1. 1. 5.1.1 Enforcement of awards made in investor-to-state proceedings pursuant to “classical” BITs Kein Zugriff
  2. 5.1.2 Enforcement of awards made in state-to-state proceedings pursuant to “classical” BITs Kein Zugriff
2. 1. 5.2.1 Enforcement of awards made in state-to-state proceedings pursuant to EU trade and association agreements Kein Zugriff
  2. 1. 5.2.2.1 Self-help measures as a means of enforcing international responsibility (of international organizations) Kein Zugriff
    2. 5.2.2.2 Self-help measures as a means of enforcing the international responsibility of the EU Kein Zugriff
3. 1. 1. 5.3.1.1 Singapore Kein Zugriff
    2. 5.3.1.2 CETA Kein Zugriff
  2. 1. 5.3.2.1 Singapore Kein Zugriff
    2. 5.3.2.2 CETA Kein Zugriff
4. 1. 5.4.1 Arguments in favor of the applicability of the New York Convention Kein Zugriff
  2. 1. 1. 5.4.2.1.1 The reciprocity argument pursuant to art. 14 of the New York Convention Kein Zugriff
    2. 5.4.2.2 Applicability of the New York Convention to arbitral awards issued by the CJEU in disputes involving the EU Kein Zugriff
    3. 1. 5.4.2.3.1 Remaining issues with bilateral agreements as the solution to enforceability issues Kein Zugriff
    4. 5.4.2.4 Grounds for refusal of recognition and enforcement under the New York Convention Kein Zugriff
5. 1. 5.5.1 Immunity of international organizations? Kein Zugriff
  2. 5.5.2 Existence of EU assets abroad that could be confiscated? Kein Zugriff
  3. 5.5.3 Potential solutions to enforcement issues due to the immunity of the EU Kein Zugriff
6. 1. 5.6.1 Enforcement of awards made in state-to-state proceedings pursuant to the ECT Kein Zugriff
  2. 5.6.2 Enforcement of awards made in investor-to-state proceedings pursuant to the ECT Kein Zugriff
7. 1. 5.7.1 Enforcement of “classical” SSDS-awards vs. enforcement of SSDS-awards under EU trade and association agreements Kein Zugriff
  2. 1. 5.7.2.1 Enforcement of awards made in investor-to-state dispute settlement proceedings Kein Zugriff
    2. 5.7.2.2 Enforcement of arbitral awards made in state-to-state dispute settlement proceedings Kein Zugriff
  3. 1. 5.7.3.1 Enforcement of arbitral awards made in investor-to-state dispute settlement proceedings Kein Zugriff
    2. 5.7.3.2 Enforcement of arbitral awards made in state-to-state dispute settlement proceedings Kein Zugriff
1. 6.1 Constitutional principles of the EU legal order Kein Zugriff
2. 1. 6.2.1 Case summary Kein Zugriff
  2. 1. 6.2.2.1 Interpretation of internal competences by arbitral tribunals Kein Zugriff
    2. 6.2.2.2 Interpretation of EU law by arbitral tribunals Kein Zugriff
    3. 1. 6.2.2.3.1 De jure spillover effects Kein Zugriff
      2. 6.2.2.3.2.1 By-passing of the CJEU in the case of overlapping provisions Kein Zugriff
        6.2.2.3.2.2 Limitation of remedies to the payment of damages Kein Zugriff
        6.2.2.3.2.3 Preliminary result Kein Zugriff
    4. 6.2.2.4 Result Kein Zugriff
3. 1. 6.3.1 Respect for human rights as a condition for the lawfulness of Community acts Kein Zugriff
  2. 6.3.2 Relevant human rights and relevance of the jurisprudence of the ECtHR Kein Zugriff
  3. 1. 6.3.3.1 Applicability of art. 6 of the ECHR to arbitration proceedings Kein Zugriff
    2. 6.3.3.2 The impact of art. 6 of the ECHR on arbitration proceedings Kein Zugriff
  4. 6.3.4 Art. 47 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights Kein Zugriff
4. 1. 6.4.1 Case summary Kein Zugriff
  2. 6.4.2 Analysis Kein Zugriff
5. 1. 6.5.1 Case summary Kein Zugriff
  2. 6.5.2 Analysis Kein Zugriff
6. 1. 6.6.1 Case summary Kein Zugriff
  2. 1. 6.6.2.1 The importance of the preliminary ruling procedure Kein Zugriff
    2. 1. 6.6.2.2.1 Compulsory jurisdiction Kein Zugriff
      2. 6.6.2.2.2 “Sufficiently close link” Kein Zugriff
      3. 6.6.2.2.3 Other key criteria, including permanency Kein Zugriff
      4. 6.6.2.2.4 Conclusion Kein Zugriff
    3. 6.6.2.3 Tribunals “of a Member State” – requests for preliminary rulings from arbitral tribunals whose seat is outside of the EU? Kein Zugriff
    4. 6.6.2.4 Permissibility of making requests for preliminary rulings from the tribunal’s perspective Kein Zugriff
    5. 6.6.2.5 Providing for an obligation of arbitral tribunals to request a preliminary ruling – the nature of the functioning of the CJEU Kein Zugriff
    6. 6.6.2.6 “Exhaustion of local remedies” as a substitute for preliminary reference procedure? Kein Zugriff
    7. 6.6.2.7 National courts as “ordinary courts” and the “quantitative argument” made in Opinion 1/09 Kein Zugriff
    8. 6.6.2.8 Result Kein Zugriff
7. 1. 6.7.1 Case Summary Kein Zugriff
  2. 1. 6.7.2.1 EU liability regime: requirements and “fault” as a requirement Kein Zugriff
    2. 6.7.2.2 The EU liability regime as a part of EU constitutional law? Kein Zugriff
    3. 1. 6.7.2.3.1 De facto suspension of EU law by way of indemnification? Kein Zugriff
      2. 6.7.2.3.2 De facto suspension of EU law by way of suspension of EU liability regime? Kein Zugriff
      3. 6.7.2.3.3 Result Kein Zugriff
8. 1. 6.8.1 Case summary Kein Zugriff
  2. 6.8.2 Analysis Kein Zugriff
9. 1. 6.9.1 Case Summary Kein Zugriff
  2. 6.9.2 Analysis Kein Zugriff
10. 1. 1. 6.10.1.1 The allocation of tasks and competences to the institutions of the Union, including the system of judicial supervision, as foreseen in the Treaties must not be affected. Kein Zugriff
    2. 6.10.1.2 The uniform interpretation of Union law throughout the Union must be secured. Kein Zugriff
    3. 6.10.1.3 Dispute settlement mechanisms must be structured in a way that protects relevant fundamental rights in the light of relevant CJEU jurisprudence. Kein Zugriff
11. 1. 6.11.1 Compatibility of dispute settlement mechanisms in EU trade and association agreements with the guidelines developed by the CJEU Kein Zugriff
  2. 1. 6.11.2.1 Applicability of the relevant guidelines developed by the CJEU to the ECT Kein Zugriff
    2. 6.11.2.2 Compatibility of the ECT with the relevant guidelines developed by the CJEU Kein Zugriff
    3. 6.11.2.3 Early Commission warnings about the ECT not being compatible with EU law Kein Zugriff
    4. 6.11.2.4 Result Kein Zugriff
  3. 1. 6.11.3.1 Singapore Kein Zugriff
    2. 6.11.3.2 CETA Kein Zugriff
12. 1. 6.12.1 Likelihood of third parties accepting the requirements developed by the CJEU Kein Zugriff
  2. 1. 6.12.2.1 Separating the internal dimension of disputes from their external dimension? Kein Zugriff
    2. 6.12.2.2 More defensive approach to be taken by the CJEU? Kein Zugriff
    3. 6.12.2.3 Special chambers within the CJEU, expansion of direct rights of action before / of the jurisdiction of the CJEU, stand-alone European investment court? Kein Zugriff
    4. 6.12.2.4 Purely international law basis for dispute settlement / “Multi-level governance” approach Kein Zugriff
    5. 6.12.2.5 Dispute settlement within the framework of the CFSP? Kein Zugriff
    6. 6.12.2.6 State-to-State dispute settlement only? Kein Zugriff
  3. 6.12.3 Proposal for an amendment of the European Treaties in order to overcome the resistance of the CJEU Kein Zugriff
13. 6.13 Excursus: Potential consequences of the EU approach to ISDS on arbitration as a form of peaceful dispute settlement Kein Zugriff
7. Conclusion Kein Zugriff Seiten 443 - 446
Bibliography Kein Zugriff Seiten 447 - 470

Literaturverzeichnis (230 Einträge)

Ahner, Juliane, Investor-Staat-Schiedsverfahren nach Europäischem Unionsrecht – Zulässigkeit und Ausgestaltung in Investitionsabkommen der Europäischen Union, Mohr Siebeck (2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Aust, Anthony, Handbook of International Law, Cambridge University Press (2005). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511494123.004
Bartels, Lorand and Ortino, Federico (editors), Regional Trade Agreements and the WTO Legal System, Oxford University Press (2006). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199206995.003.0001
Besson, Samantha and/ Hottelier, Michel and Werro, Franz (editors), Human Rights at the Center, Schulthess (2006). Google Scholar öffnen
Bethlehem, Daniel and McRae, Donald and Neufeld, Rodney and Van Damme, Isabelle (editors), The Oxford Handbook of International Trade Law, Oxford University Press (2009). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199231928.001.0001
Bischoff, Jan Asmus, Die Europäische Gemeinschaft und die Konventionen des Europäischen Privatrechts, Mohr Siebeck (2010). Google Scholar öffnen
Blackaby, Nigel and Partasides, Constantine and Redfern, Alan and Hunter, Martin, Redfern and Hunter on International Arbitration, Oxford University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
Böckstiegel, Karl-Heinz and Börner, Bodo and Kegel, Gerhard and Oehler, Dietrich and Seidl-Hohenveldern, Ignaz and Uschakow, Alexander, Kölner Studien zur Rechtsvergleichung, Band 6, Studien zum Recht der internationalen Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit, Carl Heymanns Verlag KG (1979). Google Scholar öffnen
Boisson de Chazournes, Laurence and Kohen, Marcelo and Vinuales, Jorge (editors), Diplomatic and Judicial Means of Dispute Settlement, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers (2012). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1163/9789004209985_002
Born, Gary, International Commercial Arbitration in the United States – Commentary & Materials, Kluwer Tax and Taxation Publishers. Google Scholar öffnen
Born, Gary, International Commercial Arbitration, 3rd edition, Kluwer Law International, 2009. Google Scholar öffnen
Brown, Neville and Kennedy, Tom, The Court of Justice of the European Communities, 4th edition, Sweet & Maxwell (1994). Google Scholar öffnen
Brownlie, Ian, Principles of public international law, sixth edition, Oxford, Oxford University Press (2003). Google Scholar öffnen
Bungenberg, Marc and Griebel, Jörn and Hindelang, Steffen (editors), Internationaler Investitionsschutz und Europarecht, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft (2010). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.5771/9783845226576
Bungenberg, Marc and Griebel, Jörn and Hindelang, Steffen (editors), European Yearbook of International Economic Law – Special Issue: International Investment Law and EU Law, Springer (2011). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14855-2
Bungenberg, Marc and Herrmann, Christoph (editors), Common Commercial Policy after Lisbon, Springer. Google Scholar öffnen
Bungenberg, Marc and Griebel, Jörn and Hobe, Stephan and Reinisch (editors), August, International Investment Law, C.H. Beck Hart Nomos (2015). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.5771/9783845258997-1962
Bungenberg, Marc and Reinisch, August, and Tietje, Christian (editors), EU and Investment Agreements – Open Questions and Remaining Challenges, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft (2013). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.5771/9783845246130-11
Cassese, Antonio, International Law, 2nd edition, Oxford University Press (2005). Google Scholar öffnen
Conze, Albrecht, Die völkerrechtliche Haftung der Europäischen Gemeinschaft, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft (1987). Google Scholar öffnen
Collegium, Relevance of International Humanitarian Law to Non-State Actors, Proceedings of the Bruges Colloquium, 25th- 26th October (2002). Google Scholar öffnen
Crawford, James and Pellet, Alain and Buffard, Isabelle and Wittich, Stephan, International Law between Universalism and Fragmentation – Festschrift in Honour of Gerhard Hafner (2008). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004167278.v-0.17
Cremona, Marise (editor), Developments in EU External Relations Law, Oxford University Press (2008). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199552894.003.0001
Cremona, Marise and de Witte, Bruno (editors), EU Foreign Relations Law – Constitutional Fundamentals, Hart Publishing (2008). Google Scholar öffnen
Cremona, Marise and Hilpold, Peter and Lavranos, Nikos and Schneider, Stefan and Ziegler, Andreas (editors), Reflections on the Constitutionalisation of International Economic Law, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers (2014). Google Scholar öffnen
Cremona, Marise and Thies, Anne (editors), The European Court of Justice and External Relations Law – Constitutional Challenges, Hart Publishing (2014). Google Scholar öffnen
Czernich, Dietmar, New Yorker Schiedsübereinkommen – UN Übereinkommen über die Anerkennung und Vollstreckung ausländischer Schiedssprüche, Kurzkommentar, Lexis Nexis (2008). Google Scholar öffnen
Davies, Karen, Understanding European Union Law, 3rd edition, Routledge Cavendish (2007). Google Scholar öffnen
Dimopoulos, Angelos, EU Foreign Investment Law, Oxford University Press (2011). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199698608.003.0007
Dolzer, Rudolf and Stevens, Margrete, Bilateral Investment Treaties (1995). Google Scholar öffnen
Dumberry, Patrick, The formation and identification of rules of customary international law in international investment law, Cambridge University Press (2006). Google Scholar öffnen
Eagleton, Clyde, The Responsibility of States in International Law, New York, New York University Press (1928). Google Scholar öffnen
Ehlers, Dirk and Terhechte, Jörg Philipp and Wolffgang, Hans-Michael and Schröder, Ulrich Jan (editors), Aktuelle Entwicklungen des Rechtsschutzes und der Streitbeilegung im Außenwirtschaftsrecht – Tagungsband zum 17. Münsteraner Außenwirtschaftstag. Google Scholar öffnen
Ermacora, Felix (editor), Internationale Dokumente zum Menschenrechtsschutz, 3rd Edition, Philipp Reclam Jun. (1982). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.7767/dnrm.19821985.27.jg.11
Evans, Malcom (editor), International Law, 2nd edition, Oxford University Press (2006). Google Scholar öffnen
EU Network of Independent Experts on Fundamental Rights, Commentary of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2006). Google Scholar öffnen
Fenwick, Charles, International Law, 3rd edition (1934). Google Scholar öffnen
Fischer, Peter and Köck, Heribert Franz and Karollus, Margit Maria, Europarecht, fourth edition, Linde Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
Frid, Rachel, The Relations between the EC and international organizations – Legal Theory and Practice, The Hague, Kluwer Law International (1995). Google Scholar öffnen
Gragl, Paul, The Accession of the European Union to the European Convention on Human Rights – A Study on the Compatibility of the European Union’s Legal Autonomy with the System of Human Rights Protection under the European Convention on Human Rights, Dissertation at the Institute of International Law and International Relations Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz (2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Hatje, Armin and Müller-Graff, Peter-Christian, Enzyklopädie Euoparecht – Europäisches Organisations- und Verfassungsrecht, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft. Google Scholar öffnen
Heliskoski, Joni, Mixed Agreements as a Technique for Organizing the International Relations of the European Community and its Member States, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers (2001). Google Scholar öffnen
Henke, Reginhard (editor), Vertrauensschutz in der Europäischen Union – Tagungsband der 9. Jahrestagung des Europäischen Forums für Außenwirtschaft, Verbrauchsteuern und Zoll e.V. (EFA) am 19. und 20. Juni 1997 in Nürnberg, Bundesanzeiger Verlag (1998). Google Scholar öffnen
Hillion, Christophe and Koutrakos, Panos (editors), Mixed Agreements Revisited – The EU and its Member States in the World, Hart Publishing (2010). Google Scholar öffnen
Hindelang, Steffen and Krajewski, Markus (editors), Shifting Paradigms in International Investment Law – More Balanced, Less Isolated, Increasingly Diversified, Oxford University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
Hirsch, Moshe, The Responsibility of International Organizations Toward Third Parties: Some Basic Principles, Dordrecht, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers (1995). Google Scholar öffnen
Hofmann, Rainer and Schill, Stephan and Tams, Christian (editors), Preferential Trade and Investment Agreements, Nomos. Google Scholar öffnen
Hofmann, Rainer and Tams, Christian (editors), International Investment Law and General Investment Law – From Clinical Isolation to Systemic Integration, Nomos. Google Scholar öffnen
Hötte, Franziska, Religiöse Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit, Mohr Siebeck. Google Scholar öffnen
Hübner, Kurt (editor), Europe, Canada and the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, Routledge Studies in Governance and Change in the Global Era (2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Ipsen, Knut (editor), Völkerrecht, C.H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung München, (1990). Google Scholar öffnen
Janis, Mark Weston, International Law, 5th edition, Wolters Kluwer Law & Business. Google Scholar öffnen
Jenks, Wilfred, International Immunities, London, Stevens & Sons Limited (1961). Google Scholar öffnen
Jenks, Wilfred, The Proper Law of International Organisations, London, Stevens & Sons Limited (1962). Google Scholar öffnen
Kalicki, Jean and Joubin-Bret, Anna (editors), Reshaping the Investor-State Dispute Settlement System, Brill Nijhoff. Google Scholar öffnen
Kjos, Hege Elisabeth, Applicable Law in Investor-State Arbitration – The Interplay between National and International Law, Oxford University Press (2013). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199656950.003.0008
Klabbers, Jan and Lefeber, René (editors), Essays on the Law of Treaties – A Collection of Essays in Honour of Bert Vierdag, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers (1997). Google Scholar öffnen
Klein, Friedrich, Die mittelbare Haftung im Völkerrecht, Frankfurt am Main, Vittorio Klostermann (1942). Google Scholar öffnen
Koch, Martin, Verselbständigungsprozesse internationaler Organisationen, VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften (2008). Google Scholar öffnen
Korenica, Fisnik, The EU Accession to the ECHR – Between Luxembourg’s Search for Autonomy and Strasbourg’s Credibility on Human Rights Protection, Springer. Google Scholar öffnen
Koutrakos, Panos, EU International Relations Law, second edition, Hart Publishing (2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Koziol, Helmut and Welser, Rudolf, Grundriss des Bürgerlichen Rechts – Band 1: Allgemeiner Teil, Sachenrecht, Familienrecht, thirteenth edition, Manz (2006). Google Scholar öffnen
Köck, Konstantin, State Responsibility in Public International Law and Member State Liability in European Law with Special Regard to the Issue of a Subjective Element in the Wrongful Act, Dissertation at the University of Vienna (2007). Google Scholar öffnen
Kronke, Herbert and Nacimiento, Patricia and Otto, Dirk and Port, Nicola Christine, Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards: A Global Commentary on the New York Convention (2010). Google Scholar öffnen
Kröger, Herbert, Völkerrecht – Lehrbuch Teil 1, Staatsverlag der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik (1973). Google Scholar öffnen
Lachmann, Jens-Peter, Handbuch für die Schiedsgerichtspraxis, 3rd edition, Verlag Dr. Otto Schmidt (2008). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.9785/ovs.9783504382186
Malanczuk, Peter, Akhurst’s Modern Introduction to International law, 7th revised edition, Routledge (1996). Google Scholar öffnen
Mayer, Heinz and Stöger, Karl (editors), Kommentar zu EUV und AEUV, Manz (2013). Google Scholar öffnen
McGoldrick, Dominic, International Relations Law of the European Union, European Law Series (1997). Google Scholar öffnen
Merrills, John, International Dispute Settlement, 4th edition, Cambridge University Press (2005). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165488.010
Mole, Nuala and Harby, Catharina, The right to a fair trial – A guide to the implementation of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Human Rights Handbook No. 3 (1st edition 2001, 2nd edition 2006). Google Scholar öffnen
Muchlinski, Peter and Ortino Federico and Schreuer, Christoph (editors), Oxford Handbook of International Investment Law, Oxford University Press (2008). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199231386.001.0001
Naert, Frederik, International law aspects of the EU’s security and defence policy, with a particular focus on the law of armed conflict and human rights, Law Faculty of the Catholic University of Leuven (2008). Google Scholar öffnen
Nöll, Hans-Heinrich, Die Völkerrechtssubjektivität der Europäischen Gemeinschaften und deren Bindung an das allgemeine Völkerrecht, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft (1986). Google Scholar öffnen
O’Connell, Daniel, International Law, Stevens & Sons Limited (1965). Google Scholar öffnen
O’Keeffe & Schermers (editors), Essays on European Law and Integration, Kluwer (1982). Google Scholar öffnen
Oppermann, Thomas and Classen, Claus and Nettesheim, Martin, Europarecht – Ein Studienbuch, sixth edition, C. H. Beck (2014). Google Scholar öffnen
Peers, Steve and Hervey Tamara and Kenner, Jeff and Ward, Angela (editors), The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights -- A Commentary, Hart Publishing (2014). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.5771/9783845259055_1904
Proukaki, Elena, The Problem of Enforcement in International Law – Countermeasures, the non-injured state and the idea of international community, Routledge (2010). Google Scholar öffnen
Ratz, Peter, The Wannabe Normative Power – A legal and political assessment of the implementability of the international responsibility of the European Union, Bruges, Master’s Thesis at the College of Europe (2009). Google Scholar öffnen
Redfern, Alan and Hunter, Martin and Blackaby, Nigel and Partasides Constantine, Law and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration, 4th edition, Sweet and Maxwell (2004). Google Scholar öffnen
Reinisch, August (editor), Österreichisches Handbuch des Völkerrechts – Band I: Textteil, 5th edition, Manz (2013). Google Scholar öffnen
Reinisch, August and Kriebaum, Ursula, The Law of International Relations – Liber amicorum Hanspeter Neuhold (2007). Google Scholar öffnen
Roe, Thomas and Happold, Matthew, Settlement of Investment Disputes under the Energy Charter Treaty, Cambridge University Press (2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Rosas, Allan, International Dispute Settlement: EU Practices and Procedures in German Yearbook of International Law, Duncker & Humblot (2003). Google Scholar öffnen
Rosenne, Shabtai, The World Court – What It is and how It works, 4th revised edition, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers (1989). Google Scholar öffnen
Sackmann, Julia Caroling, Transparenz im völkerrechtlichen Investitionsschutzverfahren – Gewährleistungen der ICSID-Konvention, der UNCITRAL-Schiedsregeln sowie völker- und unionsrechtliche Maßgaben, Nomos (2012). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.5771/9783845242194
Sagmeister, Holger, Die Grundsatznormen in der Europäischen Grundrechtecharta, Duncker & Humblot (2010). Google Scholar öffnen
Schill, Stephan, International Investment Law and Comparative Public Law, Oxford University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
Schlochauer, Hans Jürgen, Archiv des Völkerrechts, Tübingen, J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck) (1974/1975). Google Scholar öffnen
Seidl-Hohenveldern, Ignaz, Das Recht der Internationalen Organisationen einschließlich der Supranationalen Gemeinschaften, 2nd Edition, Carl Heymanns Verlag KG (1971). Google Scholar öffnen
Shaw, Malcolm, International Law, 5th edition, Cambridge University Press (2003). Google Scholar öffnen
Shaw, Malcolm, International Law, 6th edition, Cambridge University Press (2008). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511841637.005
Sinclair, Scott and Trew, Stuart and Mertins-Kirkwood, Hadrian (editors), Making Sense of the CETA – An Analysis of the Final Text of the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (2014). Google Scholar öffnen
Steiner, Silke, Die Rechtsdurchsetzungsmöglichkeiten der WTO als internationaler Organisation gegenüber ihren Mitgliedern im Vergleich zum Sanktionssystem der EG, Dissertation at the Faculty of Law of the University of Graz (2005). Google Scholar öffnen
Tietje, Christian (editor), International Investment Protection and Arbitration – Theoretical and Practical Perspectives, Berliner Wissenschaftsverlag. Google Scholar öffnen
Tunkin, Grigory, Theory of International Law, Harvard University Press (1974). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674434165
Van den Berg, Albert (editor), International Commercial Arbitration: Important Contemporary Questions, Kluwer Law International (2003). Google Scholar öffnen
Van den Berg, Albert Jan, The New York Arbitration Convention of 1958 – Towards a Uniform Judicial Interpretation, Kluwer Tax and Taxation Publishers (1981). Google Scholar öffnen
Van der Hout, Robin, Die völkerrechtliche Stellung der Internationalen Organisationen unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Europäischen Union, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft (2006). Google Scholar öffnen
Villiger, Mark, Customary International Law and Treaties, Dordrecht, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers (1985). Google Scholar öffnen
Von Bogdandy, Armin and Bast, Jürgen, Europäisches Verfassungsrecht – Theoretische und dogmatische Grundzüge, 2nd Edition, Springer (2003). Google Scholar öffnen
Weigand, Frank-Bernd (editor), Practitioner’s Handbook on International Arbitration, Verlag C.H. Beck München (2002). Google Scholar öffnen
Wessel, Ramses and Blockmans, Steven, Between Autonomy and Dependence: The EU Legal Order Under the Influence of International Organisations – An Introduction, The Hague, T.C.M. Asser Press/Springer (2013). Google Scholar öffnen
Articles Google Scholar öffnen
Adam, Samuel, Arbitration, Alternative Dispute Resolution Generally and the European Convention on Human Rights – An Anglo-Centric View, Journal of International Arbitration, 21:5, pp 413-438 (2004). Google Scholar öffnen
Ahlborn, Christiane, The Rules of International Organizations and the Law of International Responsibility, ACIL Research Paper, No 2011-03, pp. 397-482 (2011). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1163/157237411X634970
Ankersmit, Laurens, Belgium requests an Opinion on Investment Court System in CETA, Environmental Law Network International Review, Vol. 2, pp. 54-58 (2016). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1163/18760104-01301004
Ankersmit, Laurens, The Compatibility of Investment Arbitration in EU Trade Agreements with the EU Judicial System, Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law, Vol. 13, pp. 46-63 (2016). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1163/18760104-01301004
Axelrod, Regina, The European Energy Charter Treaty – Reality or Illusion?, Energy Policy, Vol. 24, No 6, pp. 497-505 (1996). Google Scholar öffnen
Baldwin, Edward, and Kantor, Mark and Nolan, Michael, Limits to Enforcement of ICSID Awards, Journal of International Arbitration, 23 (1), pp. 1-24 (2006). Google Scholar öffnen
Basedow, Jürgen, EU Law in International Arbitration: Referral to the European Court of Justice, Journal of International Arbitration, Volume 32, Issue 4, pp. 367-386 (2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Belohlavek, Alexander, Arbitration from Perspective of Right to Legal Protection and Right to Court Proceedings (the Right to Have One’s Case Dealt with by a Court): Significance of Autonomy and Scope of Right to Fair Trial, Czech (& Central European) Yearbook of Arbitration, Vol. 1, pp. 47-75 (2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Bermann, George, Navigating EU Law and the Law of International Arbitration, Arbitration International, Vol. 28, Issue 3, pp. 397-446 (2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Bernasconi, Nathalie, Background Paper on Vattenfall v. Germany arbitration, IISD (2009). Google Scholar öffnen
Bernasconi-Osterwalder, Nathalie and Mann, Howard, A Response to the European Commission’s December 2013 Document “Investment Provisions in the EU-Canada Free Trade Agreement (CETA)”, IISD report (2014). Google Scholar öffnen
Besson, Samantha and Utzinger, André, Future Challenges of a European Citizenship – Facing a Wide-Open Pandora’s Box, ELJ, 13, 5, pp. 573-590 (2007). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2007.00384.x
Bishop, Doak and Martin, Elaine, Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, retrieved under www.kslaw.com, on 15 May 2013. Google Scholar öffnen
Biukovic, Ljiljana, The New Face of CEFTA and its Dispute Resolution Mechanisms, Review of Central and East European Law, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Vol. 33, pp. 257-294 (2008). Google Scholar öffnen
Ballreich, Hans, in Mosler, Hermann, Völkerrecht als Rechtsordnung, ZaöRV, 36, pp. 1-25 (1976). Google Scholar öffnen
Blokker, Niels and Wessel, Ramses, Introduction: First Views at the Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations, International Organizations Law Review, 9, pp. 1-6 (2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Brandtner, Barbara, The “Drama” of the EEA – Comments on Opinions 1/91 and 1/92, EJIL, 3, pp. 300-328 (1992). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/ejil/3.2.300
Braun, Tillmann Rudolf, Investitionsschutz durch internationale Schiedsgerichte, TranState working papers, No. 89 (2009). Google Scholar öffnen
Bronckers, Marco and Goelen, Sophie, Financial Liability of the EU for violations of WTO law – A legislative proposal benefiting “innocent bystanders”, Legal Issues of Economic Integration, 39 (4), pp. 173-189 (2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Burgstaller, Markus, European Law and Investment Treaties, Journal of International Arbitration, Volume 26, Issue 2, pp. 181-216 (2006). Google Scholar öffnen
Carta, Andrea, Do investor-to-state dispute settlement mechanisms fit in the EU legal system?, elni Review, 2, pp. 30-38 (2014). Google Scholar öffnen
Chaisse, Julien, Promises and Pitfalls of the European Union Policy on Foreign Investment – How will the new EU Competence on FDI affect the Emerging Global Regime, Journal of International Economic Law, 15 (1), pp. 51-84 (2012). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgs001
Classen, Claus Dieter, Der EuGH und die Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit in Investitionsschutzabkommen, EuR, 6, pp. 611-627 (2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Clodfelter, Mark, The Future Direction of Investment Agreements in the European Union, Santa Clara Journal of International Law, Volume 12, Issue 1, pp. 159-182 (2014). Google Scholar öffnen
Cockerham, Geoffrey, The Delegation of Dispute Settlement Authority to Conventional International Governmental Organizations, International Politics, 44, pp. 732-752 (2007). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ip.8800214
Cohen, Jean, Constitutionalism beyond the State: Myth or Necessity? (A Pluralist Approach), Humanity: An International Journal of Human Rights, Humanitarianism and Development, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 127-158 (2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Collins, David, Alternative Dispute Resolution for Stakeholders in International Investment Law, Journal of International Economic Law 15(2), pp. 673-700 (2012). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgs019
Coop, Graham, Energy Charter Treaty and the European Union: Is Conflict Inevitable?, Journal of Energy and Natural Resources Law (2009). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/02646811.2009.11435222
Coop, Graham, 20 Years of the Energy Charter Treaty, ICSID Review, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 404-419 (2014). Google Scholar öffnen
Cremona, Marise, External Relations of the EU and the Member States: Competence, Mixed Agreements, International Responsibility and Effects of International Law, EUI Working Papers, Law No. 22 (2006). Google Scholar öffnen
Cuyvers, Armin, The Kadi II Judgment of the General Court: The ECJ’s Predicament and the Consequences for the Member States, European Constitutional Law Review, Vol. 7, pp. 481-510 (2011). Google Scholar öffnen
D’Aspremont, Jean, International Customary Investment Law: Story of a Paradox, Amsterdam Law School Legal Studies Research Paper, 19 (2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Dani, Marco, Remedying European Legal Pluralism – The FIAMM and Fedon Litigation and the Judicial Protection of International Trade Bystanders, EJIL, Vol. 21, No 2, pp. 303-340 (2010). Google Scholar öffnen
De Witte, Bruno, European Union Law: How autonomous is its Legal Order?, ZÖR 65, pp. 141-155 (2010). Google Scholar öffnen
De Witte, Bruno, Treaty revision in the European Union: constitutional change through international law, Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, Volume 35, pp. 51-84 (2004). Google Scholar öffnen
Dermedijev, Ivaylo, Does EU Law Impact an Arbitrator’s Independence and Impartiality?, The Journal of Eurasian Law, pp. 1-14 (2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Dimopoulos, Angelos, The Involvement of the EU in Investor-State Dispute Settlement: A Question of Responsibilities, Common Market Law Review, 51, pp. 1671-1720 (2014). Google Scholar öffnen
Eckes, Christina, International Law as Law of the EU, CLEER Working Papers, 6, pp. 1-24 (2010). Google Scholar öffnen
Eeckhout, Piet, Opinion 2/13 on EU Accession to the ECHR and Judicial Dialogue: Autonomy or Autarky?, Fordham International Law Journal, pp. 955-992 (2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Eilmansberger, Thomas, Bilateral Investment Treaties and EU Law, Common Market Law Review, 46, pp. 383-429 (2009). Google Scholar öffnen
Euler, Dimitrij, European Union and Investment Arbitration: Quo vadis?, retrieved under http://works.bepress.com/dimitrij_euler/2, on 17 July 2014. Google Scholar öffnen
Ewert, Katharina, Die Überprüfung von Schiedssprüchen auf ihre Vereinbarkeit mit europäischem Kartellrecht im Anschluss an die Eco Swiss-Entscheidung des EuGH, ZERP-Arbeitspapier 3 (2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Fawcett, James, The Impact of Article 6(1) of the Echr on Private International Law, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 56, pp. 1-47 (2007). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/iclq/lei148
Gadiyev, Kamal, Arbitration of Energy-Related Disputes under the Energy Charter Treaty, Global Jurist, Vol. 8, Issue 2, pp. 1-18 (2008). Google Scholar öffnen
Gaja, Giorgio, The Relations Between the European Union and its Member States from the Perspective of the ILC Articles on Responsibility of International Organizations, SHARES Research Paper, 25 (2013). Google Scholar öffnen
Gazzini, Tarcisio, The Role of Customary International Law in the Field of Foreign Investment, World Investment and Trade Journal, pp. 691-716 (2007). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1163/221190007X00143
Geck, Wilhelm, Völkerrechtliche Verträge und Kodifikation, ZaöRV, 36, pp. 96-146 (1976). Google Scholar öffnen
Ghouri, Ahmad Ali, Resolving Incompatibilities of Bilateral Investment Treaties of the EU Member States with the EC Treaty: Individual and Collective Options, European Law Journal 16, 6, pp. 806-830 (2010). Google Scholar öffnen
Gouiffès, Laurent, Article 27 of the Energy Charter Treaty: the role of State-to-State dispute resolution – Ad hoc arbitration under ECT Article 27 and potential relevance to investment disputes, retrieved under www.biicl.org/files/3770_lauren_gouiffies.ppt on 10 January 2015. Google Scholar öffnen
Griller, Stephan, International Law, Human Rights and the Community’s Autonomous Legal Order, European Constitutional Law Review, Vol. 4, pp. 528-553 (2008). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1017/S1574019608005282
Halberstram, Daniel, “It’s the Autonomy, Stupid!” A modest Defense of Opinion 2/13 on EU Accession to the ECHR, and the Way Forward, German Law Journal, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 105-146 (2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Happ, Richard, The Legal Status of the Investor vis-à-vis the European Communities: Some Salient Thoughts, International Arbitration Law Review, Vol. 10, Issue 3, pp. 74-81 (2007). Google Scholar öffnen
Hindelang, Steffen, Der primärrechtliche Rahmen einer EU Investitionspolitik: Zulässigkeit und Grenzen von Investor-Staat-Schiedsverfahren aufgrund künftiger EU-Abkommen, WHI-Paper 01, pp. 157-184 (2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Hindelang, Steffen, Repellent Forces: The CJEU and Investor-State Dispute Settlement, Archiv des Völkerrechts, Volume 53, pp. 68-89 (2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Hobér, Jan, Investment Arbitration and the Energy Charter Treaty, Journal of International Dispute Settlement, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 153-190 (2010). Google Scholar öffnen
Hoffmeister, Frank, Litigating against the European Union and its Member States – Who responds under the ILC’s Draft Articles on International Responsibility of International Organizations?, The European Journal of International Law, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 723-747 (2010). Google Scholar öffnen
Hoffmeister, Frank, The European Union and the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes, Chinese Journal of International Law, pp. 77-105 (2012). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/chinesejil/jms001
Jacobs, Francis, Citizenship of the European Union – A Legal Analysis, ELJ, 13, 5, pp. 591-610 (2007). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2007.00385.x
Jo, Hyeran and Namgung, Hyun, Dispute Settlement Mechanisms in Preferential Trade Agreements: Democracy, Boilerplates and the Multilateral Trade Regime, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 56 No. 6, pp. 1041-1068 (2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Kleinheisterkamp, Jan, European Policy Space in International Investment Law, ICSID Review, Vol. 27 No. 2 (2012). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/icsidreview/sis015
Kleinheisterkamp, Jan, Financial Responsibility in the European International Investment Policy, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 63 (2014). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1017/S0020589314000116
Kleinheisterkamp, Jan, Investment Protection and EU Law: The Intra- and Extra-EU Dimension of the Energy Charter Treaty, Journal of International Economic Law 15 (1) (2012). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgs004
Kleinheisterkamp, Jan, Investment Treaty Law and the Fear for Sovereignty: Transnational Challenges and Solutions, Modern Law Review, pp. 793-825 (2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Kleinheisterkamp, Jan, Is there a Need for Investor-State Arbitration in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)?, 17 March 2014, retrieved under http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2410188 on 28 June 2014. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2410188
Kleinheisterkamp, Jan, The next 10 Year ECT Investment Arbitration: A Vision for the Future – from a European Law Perspective, LSE Law, Society and Economy Working Papers, 7 (2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Kleinheisterkamp, Jan, Who is Afraid of Investor-State Arbitration? Or Comparative Law?, LSE Law Policy Briefing 4 (2014). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2483775
Kokott, Juliane and Sobotta, Christoph, Constitutional Core Values and International Law – Finding the Balance?, The European Journal of International Law Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 1015-1024 (2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Kuijer, Martin, Applicability of Article 6 ECHR [chapter of Martin Kuijer’s doctoral thesis “The Blindfold of Lady Justice - Judicial Independence and Impartiality in Light of the Requirements of Article 6 ECHR”, Wolf Legal Publishers 2004], retrieved on www.blhr.org on 17 September 2013. Google Scholar öffnen
Lavranos, Nikos, Is an international investor-to-state arbitration system under the auspices of the ECJ possible?, 2011, retrieved under http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1973491 on 26 December 2015. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1973491
Lavranos, Nikos, Member States‘ Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs): Lost in Transition?, retrieved under http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1935625 on 3 January 2015. Google Scholar öffnen
Lavranos, Nikos, New Developments in the Interaction between International Investment Law and EU Law, The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, 9, pp. 409-441 (2010). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1163/157180310X541103
Leal-Arcas, Rafael, The European Community and Mixed Agreements, European Foreign Affairs Review 6, pp. 483-513 (2001). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1023/A:1014268611117
Lock, Tobias, Walking on a Tightrope: The Draft ECHR Accession Agreement and the Autonomy of the EU Legal Order, Common Market Law Review, 48 (2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Lock, Tobias, The Future of the European Union’s accession to the European Convention on Human Rights after Opinion 2/13: is it still possible and is it still desirable?, European Constitutional Law Review, Volume 11, Issue 2, pp. 1025-1054 (2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Mavroidis, Petros, Remedies in the WTO Legal System: Between a Rock and a Hard Place, EJIL, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 863-813 (2000). Google Scholar öffnen
Miron, Smaranda, The Last Bite of the BITs – Supremacy of EU Law versus Investment Treaty Arbitration, European Law Journal, Vol. 20, No. 30, pp. 332-345 (2014). Google Scholar öffnen
Murray, Odette, Piercing the Corporate Veil: The Responsibility of Member States of an International Organization, International Organizations Law Review 8, pp. 291-347 (2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Nacimiento, Patricia and Panov, Andrey and Stein, Max, Energy Charter Arbitration and the CIS Countries, The European, Middle Eastern and African Arbitration Review (2014). Google Scholar öffnen
Neumann, Peter, Immunity of International Organizations and Alternative Remedies against the United Nations, retrieved under Google Scholar öffnen
http://intlaw.univie.ac.at/fileadmin/user_upload/int_beziehungen/Internetpubl/neumann.pdf on 27 June 2013. Google Scholar öffnen
Nottage, Luke, The Rise and Possible Fall of investor-State Arbitration in Asia: A Skeptic’s View of Australia’s “Gillard Government Trade Policy Statement”, Legal Studies Research Paper 11/32, University of Sydney, pp. 1-25 (2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Odermatt, Jed, When a Fence Becomes a Cage: The Principle of Autonomy in EU External Relations Law, EUI Working Papers (2016). Google Scholar öffnen
Olivet, Cecilia and Eberhardt, Pia, Profiting from Crisis – How corporations and lawyers are scavenging profits from Europe’s crisis countries, Transnational Institute and Corporate Europe Observatory (2014). Google Scholar öffnen
Paassivirta, Esa and Kuijper, Pieter Jan, “Does one size fit all? The European Community and the responsibility of international organizations”, Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, 36, pp. 169-226 (2005). Google Scholar öffnen
Paparinskis, Martins, Investment Treaty Arbitration and the (New) Law of State Responsibility, EJIL, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 617-647 (2013). Google Scholar öffnen
Parish, Matthew, International Courts and the European Legal Order, EJIL, Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 141-153 (2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Pauwelyn, Joost, A Typology of Multilateral Treaty Obligations: Are WTO Obligations Bilateral or Collective in Nature?, EJIL, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 907-951 (2003). Google Scholar öffnen
Perry, Sebastian and Karadelis, Kyriaki, Sun rises on Czech energy claims, Global Arbitration Review, 19 February 2014, retrieved under www.globalarbitrationreview.com on 29 March 2014. Google Scholar öffnen
Phelan, William, Why do the EU Member States accept the supremacy of the European Law? Explaining the supremacy as an alternative to bilateral reciprocity, Journal of European Public Policy, 18:5, pp. 766-777 (2011). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2011.586803
Pohl, Joachim and Mashigo, Kekeletso and Nohen, Alexis, Dispute Settlement Provisions in International Investment Agreements: A Large Sample Survey, OECD Working Papers on International Investment, OECD Publishing (2012). Google Scholar öffnen
Posch, Albert, The Kadi Case: Rethinking the Relationship between EU Law and International Law?, The Columbia Journal of European Law Online, Vol. 15, pp. 1-5 (2009). Google Scholar öffnen
Potacs, Michael, Effet Utile als Auslegungsgrundsatz, EuR, Heft 4, pp. 465-487 (2009). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.5771/9783845213514-267
Rainer, Arnold, A Fundamental Rights Charter for the European Union, Tulane European & Civil Law Forum, 15/16, pp. 43-59 (2000/2001). Google Scholar öffnen
Ramírez Robles, Edna, Political & quasi-adjudicative dispute settlement models in European Union Free Trade Agreements: Is the quasi-adjudicative model a trend or is it just another model?, Staff Working Paper ERSD, No. 2006-09. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.946934
Reinisch, August, Developing Human Rights and Humanitarian Law Accountability of the Security Council for the Imposition of Economic Sanctions, The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 95, No. 4, pp. 851-872 (2001). Google Scholar öffnen
Reinisch, August, European Court Practice Concerning State Immunity from Enforcement Measures, EJIL, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 803-836 (2006). Google Scholar öffnen
Reinisch, August, Putting the Pieces Together … an EU Model BIT?, The Journal of World Investment & Trade, Volume 15, Issue 3-4, pp. 679-704 (2014). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1163/22119000-01504015
Reinisch, August, The EU on the Investment Path – Quo vadis Europe? The Future of EU BITs and other Investment Agreements [Draft paper], retrieved under www.law.scu.edu, on 15 May 2013. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2236192
Reinisch, August, The Future Shape of EU Investment Agreements, ICSID Review, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 179-196 (2013). Google Scholar öffnen
Rosas, Allan, Implementation and Enforcement of WTO Dispute Settlement Findings: An EU Perspective, Journal of Economic Law, pp. 131-144 (2001). Google Scholar öffnen
Rosas, Allan, The Status in EU Law of International Agreements Concluded by EU Member States, Fordham International Law Journal, Vol. 34, Issue 5, pp. 1304-1345 (2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Schicho, Luca, Member State BITs after the Treaty of Lisbon: Solid Foundation or First Victims of EU Investment Policy?, Research Paper in Law 02/2012, Department of European Legal Studies of the College of Europe. Google Scholar öffnen
Schönwald, Lars, The Possible Future of Promoting and Protecting European Investments in Sub-Saharan Africa, Goettingen Journal of International Law, 5, pp. 487-531 (2013). Google Scholar öffnen
Schreuer, Christoph, The Relevance of Public International Law in International Commercial Arbitration: Investment Disputes, retrieved under http://www.univie.ac.at/intlaw/wordpress/pdf/81_csunpublpaper_1.pdf on 13 September 2013. Google Scholar öffnen
Shaffer, Gregory, What's new in EU trade dispute settlement? Judicialization, public–private networks and the WTO legal order, Journal of European Public Policy, 13:6, pp. 832-850 (2006). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/13501760600837153
Shihata, Ibrahim, Implementation, Enforcement and Compliance with International Environmental Agreements – Practical Suggestions in Light of the World Bank’s Experience, International Environmental Law Review, 37, pp. 37-51 (1997). Google Scholar öffnen
Simma, Bruno, Foreign Investment Arbitration: A Place for Human Rights?, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 60, pp. 573-596 (2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Singh, Sachet and Sharma Sooraj, Investor-State Dispute Settlement Mechanism: The Quest for a Workable Roadmap, Merkourious, Vol. 29/Issue 76, pp. 88-101 (2013). Google Scholar öffnen
Stanic, Ana, The Arbitration Agreement Arbitrability, EU Law: Deterring Energy Investments and a Source of Friction, in Austrian Yearbook on International Arbitration, pp. 31-50 (2015). Google Scholar öffnen
Steinberger, Eva, The WTO Treaty as a Mixed Agreement: Problems with the EC’s and the EC Member States’ Membership of the WTO, The European Journal of International Law Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 837-862 (2006). Google Scholar öffnen
Storgaard, Louise Halleskov, EU Law Autonomy versus European Fundamental Rights Protection – On Opinion 2/13 on EU Accession to the ECHR, Human Rights Law Review, 15, pp. 485-521 (2015). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngv012
Šturma, Pavel, Drawing a line between the responsibility of an international organization and its member states under international law, Czech Yearbook of Public and Private International Law, 2, pp. 1-19 (2011). Google Scholar öffnen
Szepesi, Stefan, Comparing EU free trade agreements – Dispute Settlement, InBrief 6G, pp. 1-8 (2004). Google Scholar öffnen
Tienhaara, Kyla, Once BITten, twice shy? The uncertain future of “shared sovereignty” in investment treaty arbitration, Policy and Society (30), pp. 185-196 (2011). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1016/j.polsoc.2011.07.003
Tucker, Andrew, The Energy Charter Treaty and “Compulsory” International State/Investor Arbitration, Leiden Journal of Investment Law, Vol. 11, pp. 513-526 (1998). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1017/S0922156598000375
Tzanakopoulos, Antonios, National Treatment and MFN in the (invisible) EU Model BIT, Journal of World Investment and Trade, Vol. 15, pp. 484-505 (2014). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1163/22119000-01504007
Uwera, Gisèle, Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) in Future EU Investment-Related Agreements: Is the Autonomy of the EU Legal Order an Obstacle?, The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, pp. 102-151 (2016). Google Scholar öffnen
Van den Berg, Albert Jan, The New York Convention of 1958: An Overview, 2009, retrieved on http://www.arbitration-icca.org/articles.html?author=Albert_Jan_van_den_ Berg&sort=author on 18 September 2013. Google Scholar öffnen
Van den Broek, Naboth, Power Paradoxes in Enforcement and Implementation of World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Reports – Interdisciplinary Approaches and New Reports, Journal of World Trade, 37, 1, pp. 127-162 (2003). Google Scholar öffnen
Van Harten, Gus, Comments on the European Commission’s Approach to Investor-State Arbitration in TTIP and CETA, Osgoode Hall Law School Research Paper No. 59, pp. 1-55 (2014). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2466692
Van Rossem, Jan Willem, Interaction between EU law and international law in the light of Intertanko and Kadi: The dilemma of norms binding the Member States but not the Community, Centre for the Law of EU External Relations Working Papers, Vol. 4, pp. 183-227 (2009). Google Scholar öffnen
Verdross, Alfred, Jus Dispositivum and Jus Cogens in International Law, AJIL, 60, pp. 55-245 (1966). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2307/2196718
von Papp, Konstanze, Clash of “autonomous legal orders”: Can EU Member State courts bridge the jurisdictional divide between investment tribunals and the ECJ? A plea for direct referral from investment tribunals to the ECJ, Common Market Law Review, 50, pp. 1039-1082 (2013). Google Scholar öffnen
Westcott, Thomas, Recent practice on fair and equitable treatment, Journal of World Investment and Trade, 8, pp. 409-430 (2007). Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1163/221190007X00080
Wiesinger, Eva, State Immunity From Enforcement Measures, 2006, retrieved under www.intlaw.univie.ac.at/index.php on 13 June 2013. Google Scholar öffnen