Cover of book: International and European Law Problems of Investment Arbitration involving the EU
Buy in shop
, to see if you have full access to this publication.
Book Titles No access

International and European Law Problems of Investment Arbitration involving the EU

Authors:
Publisher:
 29.09.2017

Bibliographic data

Copyright year
2017
Publication date
29.09.2017
ISBN-Print
978-3-8487-4415-2
ISBN-Online
978-3-8452-8632-7
Publisher
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Series
Schriften zur Europäischen Integration und Internationalen Wirtschaftsordnung
Volume
41
Language
German
Pages
470
Product type
Book Titles

Table of contents

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

Bibliography (230)

  1. Ahner, Juliane, Investor-Staat-Schiedsverfahren nach Europäischem Unionsrecht – Zulässigkeit und Ausgestaltung in Investitionsabkommen der Europäischen Union, Mohr Siebeck (2015). Open Google Scholar
  2. Aust, Anthony, Handbook of International Law, Cambridge University Press (2005). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511494123.004
  3. Bartels, Lorand and Ortino, Federico (editors), Regional Trade Agreements and the WTO Legal System, Oxford University Press (2006). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199206995.003.0001
  4. Besson, Samantha and/ Hottelier, Michel and Werro, Franz (editors), Human Rights at the Center, Schulthess (2006). Open Google Scholar
  5. Bethlehem, Daniel and McRae, Donald and Neufeld, Rodney and Van Damme, Isabelle (editors), The Oxford Handbook of International Trade Law, Oxford University Press (2009). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199231928.001.0001
  6. Bischoff, Jan Asmus, Die Europäische Gemeinschaft und die Konventionen des Europäischen Privatrechts, Mohr Siebeck (2010). Open Google Scholar
  7. Blackaby, Nigel and Partasides, Constantine and Redfern, Alan and Hunter, Martin, Redfern and Hunter on International Arbitration, Oxford University Press. Open Google Scholar
  8. 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). Open Google Scholar
  9. Boisson de Chazournes, Laurence and Kohen, Marcelo and Vinuales, Jorge (editors), Diplomatic and Judicial Means of Dispute Settlement, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers (2012). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1163/9789004209985_002
  10. Born, Gary, International Commercial Arbitration in the United States – Commentary & Materials, Kluwer Tax and Taxation Publishers. Open Google Scholar
  11. Born, Gary, International Commercial Arbitration, 3rd edition, Kluwer Law International, 2009. Open Google Scholar
  12. Brown, Neville and Kennedy, Tom, The Court of Justice of the European Communities, 4th edition, Sweet & Maxwell (1994). Open Google Scholar
  13. Brownlie, Ian, Principles of public international law, sixth edition, Oxford, Oxford University Press (2003). Open Google Scholar
  14. Bungenberg, Marc and Griebel, Jörn and Hindelang, Steffen (editors), Internationaler Investitionsschutz und Europarecht, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft (2010). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845226576
  15. 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). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14855-2
  16. Bungenberg, Marc and Herrmann, Christoph (editors), Common Commercial Policy after Lisbon, Springer. Open Google Scholar
  17. Bungenberg, Marc and Griebel, Jörn and Hobe, Stephan and Reinisch (editors), August, International Investment Law, C.H. Beck Hart Nomos (2015). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845258997-1962
  18. Bungenberg, Marc and Reinisch, August, and Tietje, Christian (editors), EU and Investment Agreements – Open Questions and Remaining Challenges, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft (2013). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845246130-11
  19. Cassese, Antonio, International Law, 2nd edition, Oxford University Press (2005). Open Google Scholar
  20. Conze, Albrecht, Die völkerrechtliche Haftung der Europäischen Gemeinschaft, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft (1987). Open Google Scholar
  21. Collegium, Relevance of International Humanitarian Law to Non-State Actors, Proceedings of the Bruges Colloquium, 25th- 26th October (2002). Open Google Scholar
  22. Crawford, James and Pellet, Alain and Buffard, Isabelle and Wittich, Stephan, International Law between Universalism and Fragmentation – Festschrift in Honour of Gerhard Hafner (2008). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004167278.v-0.17
  23. Cremona, Marise (editor), Developments in EU External Relations Law, Oxford University Press (2008). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199552894.003.0001
  24. Cremona, Marise and de Witte, Bruno (editors), EU Foreign Relations Law – Constitutional Fundamentals, Hart Publishing (2008). Open Google Scholar
  25. 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). Open Google Scholar
  26. Cremona, Marise and Thies, Anne (editors), The European Court of Justice and External Relations Law – Constitutional Challenges, Hart Publishing (2014). Open Google Scholar
  27. Czernich, Dietmar, New Yorker Schiedsübereinkommen – UN Übereinkommen über die Anerkennung und Vollstreckung ausländischer Schiedssprüche, Kurzkommentar, Lexis Nexis (2008). Open Google Scholar
  28. Davies, Karen, Understanding European Union Law, 3rd edition, Routledge Cavendish (2007). Open Google Scholar
  29. Dimopoulos, Angelos, EU Foreign Investment Law, Oxford University Press (2011). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199698608.003.0007
  30. Dolzer, Rudolf and Stevens, Margrete, Bilateral Investment Treaties (1995). Open Google Scholar
  31. Dumberry, Patrick, The formation and identification of rules of customary international law in international investment law, Cambridge University Press (2006). Open Google Scholar
  32. Eagleton, Clyde, The Responsibility of States in International Law, New York, New York University Press (1928). Open Google Scholar
  33. 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. Open Google Scholar
  34. Ermacora, Felix (editor), Internationale Dokumente zum Menschenrechtsschutz, 3rd Edition, Philipp Reclam Jun. (1982). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.7767/dnrm.19821985.27.jg.11
  35. Evans, Malcom (editor), International Law, 2nd edition, Oxford University Press (2006). Open Google Scholar
  36. EU Network of Independent Experts on Fundamental Rights, Commentary of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2006). Open Google Scholar
  37. Fenwick, Charles, International Law, 3rd edition (1934). Open Google Scholar
  38. Fischer, Peter and Köck, Heribert Franz and Karollus, Margit Maria, Europarecht, fourth edition, Linde Verlag. Open Google Scholar
  39. Frid, Rachel, The Relations between the EC and international organizations – Legal Theory and Practice, The Hague, Kluwer Law International (1995). Open Google Scholar
  40. 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). Open Google Scholar
  41. Hatje, Armin and Müller-Graff, Peter-Christian, Enzyklopädie Euoparecht – Europäisches Organisations- und Verfassungsrecht, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft. Open Google Scholar
  42. Heliskoski, Joni, Mixed Agreements as a Technique for Organizing the International Relations of the European Community and its Member States, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers (2001). Open Google Scholar
  43. 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). Open Google Scholar
  44. Hillion, Christophe and Koutrakos, Panos (editors), Mixed Agreements Revisited – The EU and its Member States in the World, Hart Publishing (2010). Open Google Scholar
  45. Hindelang, Steffen and Krajewski, Markus (editors), Shifting Paradigms in International Investment Law – More Balanced, Less Isolated, Increasingly Diversified, Oxford University Press. Open Google Scholar
  46. Hirsch, Moshe, The Responsibility of International Organizations Toward Third Parties: Some Basic Principles, Dordrecht, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers (1995). Open Google Scholar
  47. Hofmann, Rainer and Schill, Stephan and Tams, Christian (editors), Preferential Trade and Investment Agreements, Nomos. Open Google Scholar
  48. Hofmann, Rainer and Tams, Christian (editors), International Investment Law and General Investment Law – From Clinical Isolation to Systemic Integration, Nomos. Open Google Scholar
  49. Hötte, Franziska, Religiöse Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit, Mohr Siebeck. Open Google Scholar
  50. Hübner, Kurt (editor), Europe, Canada and the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, Routledge Studies in Governance and Change in the Global Era (2011). Open Google Scholar
  51. Ipsen, Knut (editor), Völkerrecht, C.H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung München, (1990). Open Google Scholar
  52. Janis, Mark Weston, International Law, 5th edition, Wolters Kluwer Law & Business. Open Google Scholar
  53. Jenks, Wilfred, International Immunities, London, Stevens & Sons Limited (1961). Open Google Scholar
  54. Jenks, Wilfred, The Proper Law of International Organisations, London, Stevens & Sons Limited (1962). Open Google Scholar
  55. Kalicki, Jean and Joubin-Bret, Anna (editors), Reshaping the Investor-State Dispute Settlement System, Brill Nijhoff. Open Google Scholar
  56. Kjos, Hege Elisabeth, Applicable Law in Investor-State Arbitration – The Interplay between National and International Law, Oxford University Press (2013). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199656950.003.0008
  57. 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). Open Google Scholar
  58. Klein, Friedrich, Die mittelbare Haftung im Völkerrecht, Frankfurt am Main, Vittorio Klostermann (1942). Open Google Scholar
  59. Koch, Martin, Verselbständigungsprozesse internationaler Organisationen, VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften (2008). Open Google Scholar
  60. Korenica, Fisnik, The EU Accession to the ECHR – Between Luxembourg’s Search for Autonomy and Strasbourg’s Credibility on Human Rights Protection, Springer. Open Google Scholar
  61. Koutrakos, Panos, EU International Relations Law, second edition, Hart Publishing (2015). Open Google Scholar
  62. Koziol, Helmut and Welser, Rudolf, Grundriss des Bürgerlichen Rechts – Band 1: Allgemeiner Teil, Sachenrecht, Familienrecht, thirteenth edition, Manz (2006). Open Google Scholar
  63. 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). Open Google Scholar
  64. 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). Open Google Scholar
  65. Kröger, Herbert, Völkerrecht – Lehrbuch Teil 1, Staatsverlag der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik (1973). Open Google Scholar
  66. Lachmann, Jens-Peter, Handbuch für die Schiedsgerichtspraxis, 3rd edition, Verlag Dr. Otto Schmidt (2008). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.9785/ovs.9783504382186
  67. Malanczuk, Peter, Akhurst’s Modern Introduction to International law, 7th revised edition, Routledge (1996). Open Google Scholar
  68. Mayer, Heinz and Stöger, Karl (editors), Kommentar zu EUV und AEUV, Manz (2013). Open Google Scholar
  69. McGoldrick, Dominic, International Relations Law of the European Union, European Law Series (1997). Open Google Scholar
  70. Merrills, John, International Dispute Settlement, 4th edition, Cambridge University Press (2005). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165488.010
  71. 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). Open Google Scholar
  72. Muchlinski, Peter and Ortino Federico and Schreuer, Christoph (editors), Oxford Handbook of International Investment Law, Oxford University Press (2008). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199231386.001.0001
  73. 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). Open Google Scholar
  74. Nöll, Hans-Heinrich, Die Völkerrechtssubjektivität der Europäischen Gemeinschaften und deren Bindung an das allgemeine Völkerrecht, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft (1986). Open Google Scholar
  75. O’Connell, Daniel, International Law, Stevens & Sons Limited (1965). Open Google Scholar
  76. O’Keeffe & Schermers (editors), Essays on European Law and Integration, Kluwer (1982). Open Google Scholar
  77. Oppermann, Thomas and Classen, Claus and Nettesheim, Martin, Europarecht – Ein Studienbuch, sixth edition, C. H. Beck (2014). Open Google Scholar
  78. Peers, Steve and Hervey Tamara and Kenner, Jeff and Ward, Angela (editors), The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights -- A Commentary, Hart Publishing (2014). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845259055_1904
  79. Proukaki, Elena, The Problem of Enforcement in International Law – Countermeasures, the non-injured state and the idea of international community, Routledge (2010). Open Google Scholar
  80. 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). Open Google Scholar
  81. Redfern, Alan and Hunter, Martin and Blackaby, Nigel and Partasides Constantine, Law and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration, 4th edition, Sweet and Maxwell (2004). Open Google Scholar
  82. Reinisch, August (editor), Österreichisches Handbuch des Völkerrechts – Band I: Textteil, 5th edition, Manz (2013). Open Google Scholar
  83. Reinisch, August and Kriebaum, Ursula, The Law of International Relations – Liber amicorum Hanspeter Neuhold (2007). Open Google Scholar
  84. Roe, Thomas and Happold, Matthew, Settlement of Investment Disputes under the Energy Charter Treaty, Cambridge University Press (2011). Open Google Scholar
  85. Rosas, Allan, International Dispute Settlement: EU Practices and Procedures in German Yearbook of International Law, Duncker & Humblot (2003). Open Google Scholar
  86. Rosenne, Shabtai, The World Court – What It is and how It works, 4th revised edition, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers (1989). Open Google Scholar
  87. Sackmann, Julia Caroling, Transparenz im völkerrechtlichen Investitionsschutzverfahren – Gewährleistungen der ICSID-Konvention, der UNCITRAL-Schiedsregeln sowie völker- und unionsrechtliche Maßgaben, Nomos (2012). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845242194
  88. Sagmeister, Holger, Die Grundsatznormen in der Europäischen Grundrechtecharta, Duncker & Humblot (2010). Open Google Scholar
  89. Schill, Stephan, International Investment Law and Comparative Public Law, Oxford University Press. Open Google Scholar
  90. Schlochauer, Hans Jürgen, Archiv des Völkerrechts, Tübingen, J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck) (1974/1975). Open Google Scholar
  91. Seidl-Hohenveldern, Ignaz, Das Recht der Internationalen Organisationen einschließlich der Supranationalen Gemeinschaften, 2nd Edition, Carl Heymanns Verlag KG (1971). Open Google Scholar
  92. Shaw, Malcolm, International Law, 5th edition, Cambridge University Press (2003). Open Google Scholar
  93. Shaw, Malcolm, International Law, 6th edition, Cambridge University Press (2008). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511841637.005
  94. 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). Open Google Scholar
  95. 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). Open Google Scholar
  96. Tietje, Christian (editor), International Investment Protection and Arbitration – Theoretical and Practical Perspectives, Berliner Wissenschaftsverlag. Open Google Scholar
  97. Tunkin, Grigory, Theory of International Law, Harvard University Press (1974). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674434165
  98. Van den Berg, Albert (editor), International Commercial Arbitration: Important Contemporary Questions, Kluwer Law International (2003). Open Google Scholar
  99. Van den Berg, Albert Jan, The New York Arbitration Convention of 1958 – Towards a Uniform Judicial Interpretation, Kluwer Tax and Taxation Publishers (1981). Open Google Scholar
  100. Van der Hout, Robin, Die völkerrechtliche Stellung der Internationalen Organisationen unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Europäischen Union, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft (2006). Open Google Scholar
  101. Villiger, Mark, Customary International Law and Treaties, Dordrecht, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers (1985). Open Google Scholar
  102. Von Bogdandy, Armin and Bast, Jürgen, Europäisches Verfassungsrecht – Theoretische und dogmatische Grundzüge, 2nd Edition, Springer (2003). Open Google Scholar
  103. Weigand, Frank-Bernd (editor), Practitioner’s Handbook on International Arbitration, Verlag C.H. Beck München (2002). Open Google Scholar
  104. 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). Open Google Scholar
  105. Articles Open Google Scholar
  106. 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). Open Google Scholar
  107. Ahlborn, Christiane, The Rules of International Organizations and the Law of International Responsibility, ACIL Research Paper, No 2011-03, pp. 397-482 (2011). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1163/157237411X634970
  108. Ankersmit, Laurens, Belgium requests an Opinion on Investment Court System in CETA, Environmental Law Network International Review, Vol. 2, pp. 54-58 (2016). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1163/18760104-01301004
  109. 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). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1163/18760104-01301004
  110. Axelrod, Regina, The European Energy Charter Treaty – Reality or Illusion?, Energy Policy, Vol. 24, No 6, pp. 497-505 (1996). Open Google Scholar
  111. Baldwin, Edward, and Kantor, Mark and Nolan, Michael, Limits to Enforcement of ICSID Awards, Journal of International Arbitration, 23 (1), pp. 1-24 (2006). Open Google Scholar
  112. 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). Open Google Scholar
  113. 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). Open Google Scholar
  114. Bermann, George, Navigating EU Law and the Law of International Arbitration, Arbitration International, Vol. 28, Issue 3, pp. 397-446 (2012). Open Google Scholar
  115. Bernasconi, Nathalie, Background Paper on Vattenfall v. Germany arbitration, IISD (2009). Open Google Scholar
  116. 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). Open Google Scholar
  117. 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). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2007.00384.x
  118. Bishop, Doak and Martin, Elaine, Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, retrieved under www.kslaw.com, on 15 May 2013. Open Google Scholar
  119. 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). Open Google Scholar
  120. Ballreich, Hans, in Mosler, Hermann, Völkerrecht als Rechtsordnung, ZaöRV, 36, pp. 1-25 (1976). Open Google Scholar
  121. 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). Open Google Scholar
  122. Brandtner, Barbara, The “Drama” of the EEA – Comments on Opinions 1/91 and 1/92, EJIL, 3, pp. 300-328 (1992). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/ejil/3.2.300
  123. Braun, Tillmann Rudolf, Investitionsschutz durch internationale Schiedsgerichte, TranState working papers, No. 89 (2009). Open Google Scholar
  124. 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). Open Google Scholar
  125. Burgstaller, Markus, European Law and Investment Treaties, Journal of International Arbitration, Volume 26, Issue 2, pp. 181-216 (2006). Open Google Scholar
  126. Carta, Andrea, Do investor-to-state dispute settlement mechanisms fit in the EU legal system?, elni Review, 2, pp. 30-38 (2014). Open Google Scholar
  127. 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). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgs001
  128. Classen, Claus Dieter, Der EuGH und die Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit in Investitionsschutzabkommen, EuR, 6, pp. 611-627 (2012). Open Google Scholar
  129. 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). Open Google Scholar
  130. Cockerham, Geoffrey, The Delegation of Dispute Settlement Authority to Conventional International Governmental Organizations, International Politics, 44, pp. 732-752 (2007). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ip.8800214
  131. 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). Open Google Scholar
  132. Collins, David, Alternative Dispute Resolution for Stakeholders in International Investment Law, Journal of International Economic Law 15(2), pp. 673-700 (2012). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgs019
  133. Coop, Graham, Energy Charter Treaty and the European Union: Is Conflict Inevitable?, Journal of Energy and Natural Resources Law (2009). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1080/02646811.2009.11435222
  134. Coop, Graham, 20 Years of the Energy Charter Treaty, ICSID Review, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 404-419 (2014). Open Google Scholar
  135. 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). Open Google Scholar
  136. 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). Open Google Scholar
  137. D’Aspremont, Jean, International Customary Investment Law: Story of a Paradox, Amsterdam Law School Legal Studies Research Paper, 19 (2011). Open Google Scholar
  138. 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). Open Google Scholar
  139. De Witte, Bruno, European Union Law: How autonomous is its Legal Order?, ZÖR 65, pp. 141-155 (2010). Open Google Scholar
  140. 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). Open Google Scholar
  141. Dermedijev, Ivaylo, Does EU Law Impact an Arbitrator’s Independence and Impartiality?, The Journal of Eurasian Law, pp. 1-14 (2015). Open Google Scholar
  142. 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). Open Google Scholar
  143. Eckes, Christina, International Law as Law of the EU, CLEER Working Papers, 6, pp. 1-24 (2010). Open Google Scholar
  144. 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). Open Google Scholar
  145. Eilmansberger, Thomas, Bilateral Investment Treaties and EU Law, Common Market Law Review, 46, pp. 383-429 (2009). Open Google Scholar
  146. Euler, Dimitrij, European Union and Investment Arbitration: Quo vadis?, retrieved under http://works.bepress.com/dimitrij_euler/2, on 17 July 2014. Open Google Scholar
  147. 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). Open Google Scholar
  148. 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). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/iclq/lei148
  149. Gadiyev, Kamal, Arbitration of Energy-Related Disputes under the Energy Charter Treaty, Global Jurist, Vol. 8, Issue 2, pp. 1-18 (2008). Open Google Scholar
  150. 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). Open Google Scholar
  151. Gazzini, Tarcisio, The Role of Customary International Law in the Field of Foreign Investment, World Investment and Trade Journal, pp. 691-716 (2007). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1163/221190007X00143
  152. Geck, Wilhelm, Völkerrechtliche Verträge und Kodifikation, ZaöRV, 36, pp. 96-146 (1976). Open Google Scholar
  153. 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). Open Google Scholar
  154. 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. Open Google Scholar
  155. Griller, Stephan, International Law, Human Rights and the Community’s Autonomous Legal Order, European Constitutional Law Review, Vol. 4, pp. 528-553 (2008). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1017/S1574019608005282
  156. 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). Open Google Scholar
  157. 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). Open Google Scholar
  158. 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). Open Google Scholar
  159. Hindelang, Steffen, Repellent Forces: The CJEU and Investor-State Dispute Settlement, Archiv des Völkerrechts, Volume 53, pp. 68-89 (2015). Open Google Scholar
  160. Hobér, Jan, Investment Arbitration and the Energy Charter Treaty, Journal of International Dispute Settlement, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 153-190 (2010). Open Google Scholar
  161. 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). Open Google Scholar
  162. Hoffmeister, Frank, The European Union and the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes, Chinese Journal of International Law, pp. 77-105 (2012). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/chinesejil/jms001
  163. Jacobs, Francis, Citizenship of the European Union – A Legal Analysis, ELJ, 13, 5, pp. 591-610 (2007). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2007.00385.x
  164. 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). Open Google Scholar
  165. Kleinheisterkamp, Jan, European Policy Space in International Investment Law, ICSID Review, Vol. 27 No. 2 (2012). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/icsidreview/sis015
  166. Kleinheisterkamp, Jan, Financial Responsibility in the European International Investment Policy, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 63 (2014). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1017/S0020589314000116
  167. 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). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgs004
  168. Kleinheisterkamp, Jan, Investment Treaty Law and the Fear for Sovereignty: Transnational Challenges and Solutions, Modern Law Review, pp. 793-825 (2015). Open Google Scholar
  169. 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. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2410188
  170. 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). Open Google Scholar
  171. Kleinheisterkamp, Jan, Who is Afraid of Investor-State Arbitration? Or Comparative Law?, LSE Law Policy Briefing 4 (2014). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2483775
  172. 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). Open Google Scholar
  173. 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. Open Google Scholar
  174. 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. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1973491
  175. 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. Open Google Scholar
  176. 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). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1163/157180310X541103
  177. Leal-Arcas, Rafael, The European Community and Mixed Agreements, European Foreign Affairs Review 6, pp. 483-513 (2001). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1023/A:1014268611117
  178. 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). Open Google Scholar
  179. 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). Open Google Scholar
  180. Mavroidis, Petros, Remedies in the WTO Legal System: Between a Rock and a Hard Place, EJIL, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 863-813 (2000). Open Google Scholar
  181. 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). Open Google Scholar
  182. Murray, Odette, Piercing the Corporate Veil: The Responsibility of Member States of an International Organization, International Organizations Law Review 8, pp. 291-347 (2011). Open Google Scholar
  183. Nacimiento, Patricia and Panov, Andrey and Stein, Max, Energy Charter Arbitration and the CIS Countries, The European, Middle Eastern and African Arbitration Review (2014). Open Google Scholar
  184. Neumann, Peter, Immunity of International Organizations and Alternative Remedies against the United Nations, retrieved under Open Google Scholar
  185. http://intlaw.univie.ac.at/fileadmin/user_upload/int_beziehungen/Internetpubl/neumann.pdf on 27 June 2013. Open Google Scholar
  186. 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). Open Google Scholar
  187. Odermatt, Jed, When a Fence Becomes a Cage: The Principle of Autonomy in EU External Relations Law, EUI Working Papers (2016). Open Google Scholar
  188. 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). Open Google Scholar
  189. 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). Open Google Scholar
  190. Paparinskis, Martins, Investment Treaty Arbitration and the (New) Law of State Responsibility, EJIL, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 617-647 (2013). Open Google Scholar
  191. Parish, Matthew, International Courts and the European Legal Order, EJIL, Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 141-153 (2012). Open Google Scholar
  192. 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). Open Google Scholar
  193. 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. Open Google Scholar
  194. 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). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2011.586803
  195. 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). Open Google Scholar
  196. 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). Open Google Scholar
  197. Potacs, Michael, Effet Utile als Auslegungsgrundsatz, EuR, Heft 4, pp. 465-487 (2009). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.5771/9783845213514-267
  198. Rainer, Arnold, A Fundamental Rights Charter for the European Union, Tulane European & Civil Law Forum, 15/16, pp. 43-59 (2000/2001). Open Google Scholar
  199. 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. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.946934
  200. 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). Open Google Scholar
  201. Reinisch, August, European Court Practice Concerning State Immunity from Enforcement Measures, EJIL, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 803-836 (2006). Open Google Scholar
  202. 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). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1163/22119000-01504015
  203. 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. Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2236192
  204. Reinisch, August, The Future Shape of EU Investment Agreements, ICSID Review, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 179-196 (2013). Open Google Scholar
  205. Rosas, Allan, Implementation and Enforcement of WTO Dispute Settlement Findings: An EU Perspective, Journal of Economic Law, pp. 131-144 (2001). Open Google Scholar
  206. 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). Open Google Scholar
  207. 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. Open Google Scholar
  208. 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). Open Google Scholar
  209. 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. Open Google Scholar
  210. 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). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1080/13501760600837153
  211. 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). Open Google Scholar
  212. Simma, Bruno, Foreign Investment Arbitration: A Place for Human Rights?, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 60, pp. 573-596 (2011). Open Google Scholar
  213. 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). Open Google Scholar
  214. 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). Open Google Scholar
  215. 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). Open Google Scholar
  216. 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). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngv012
  217. 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). Open Google Scholar
  218. Szepesi, Stefan, Comparing EU free trade agreements – Dispute Settlement, InBrief 6G, pp. 1-8 (2004). Open Google Scholar
  219. Tienhaara, Kyla, Once BITten, twice shy? The uncertain future of “shared sovereignty” in investment treaty arbitration, Policy and Society (30), pp. 185-196 (2011). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1016/j.polsoc.2011.07.003
  220. Tucker, Andrew, The Energy Charter Treaty and “Compulsory” International State/Investor Arbitration, Leiden Journal of Investment Law, Vol. 11, pp. 513-526 (1998). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1017/S0922156598000375
  221. Tzanakopoulos, Antonios, National Treatment and MFN in the (invisible) EU Model BIT, Journal of World Investment and Trade, Vol. 15, pp. 484-505 (2014). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1163/22119000-01504007
  222. 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). Open Google Scholar
  223. 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. Open Google Scholar
  224. 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). Open Google Scholar
  225. 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). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2466692
  226. 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). Open Google Scholar
  227. Verdross, Alfred, Jus Dispositivum and Jus Cogens in International Law, AJIL, 60, pp. 55-245 (1966). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.2307/2196718
  228. 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). Open Google Scholar
  229. Westcott, Thomas, Recent practice on fair and equitable treatment, Journal of World Investment and Trade, 8, pp. 409-430 (2007). Open Google Scholar doi.org/10.1163/221190007X00080
  230. Wiesinger, Eva, State Immunity From Enforcement Measures, 2006, retrieved under www.intlaw.univie.ac.at/index.php on 13 June 2013. Open Google Scholar

Similar publications

from the topics "European Law & International Law & Comparative Law"
Cover of book: Der Volkseinwand
Book Titles No access
Florian Feigl
Der Volkseinwand
Cover of book: Wie fördert die EU Menschenrechte in Drittstaaten?
Book Titles No access
Dennis Traudt
Wie fördert die EU Menschenrechte in Drittstaaten?
Cover of book: Future-Proofing in Public Law
Edited Book No access
Nicole Koblenz LL.M., Nicholas Otto, Gernot Sydow
Future-Proofing in Public Law
Cover of book: Das Weltraumrecht und seine Eignung für den Rohstoffabbau durch Privatakteure
Book Titles No access
Justus Schmidt
Das Weltraumrecht und seine Eignung für den Rohstoffabbau durch Privatakteure
Cover of book: »Free Speech« v »Political Correctness«
Book Titles No access
Hans G. Gnodtke
»Free Speech« v »Political Correctness«

Notice

This work is protected by copyright and may only be used in accordance with the provisions of the Terms of Use and License Agreement. Any use of the work beyond this is expressly prohibited and will be prosecuted.

Give feedback

We welcome your feedback on content and features. Your message helps us to continuously improve our service.

Rating
Attach images
or drag and drop
PNG or JPG (max. 3 MB)

Login

Forgotten your password?
Login via Open Athens
Don't have an account yet?
Register now

Cite publication

Download: RIS BibTex