Responsibility of the EU and the member states under EU international investment protection agreements :
[Book]
between traditional rules, proceduralisation and federalisation /
Philipp Theodor Stegmann.
Cham :
Springer,
[2019]
1 online resource
European yearbook of international economic law,
EYIEL Monographs ;
Volume 6
6
2364-8392 ;
Includes bibliographical references.
Intro; Preface; Contents; About the Author; Abbreviations; Chapter 1: Introduction; 1.1 Setting the Scene: Responsibility of the EU and the Member States Under EU IIPAs; 1.1.1 The Concept of IIPAs and ISDS: Abridged; 1.1.2 The Emergence of EU IIPAs; 1.1.3 With Power Comes Responsibility; 1.1.4 The Dawn of a New Responsibility Regime; 1.2 Aim and Structure of This Study; Chapter 2: International Obligations of the EU and the Member States Under EU IIPAs; 2.1 Capacity to Conclude IIPAs: The EU and the Member States as Subjects of International Law.
2.2 Competence to Conclude IIPAs: The EU's and the Member States' Treaty-Making Competence in the Field of Foreign Investment2.2.1 The Link Between Treaty-Making Competences Under EU Law and the Participation of the EU and the Member States in the Conclusion of a Treaty; 2.2.2 The Division of Competences Between the EU and the Member States with Respect to IIPAs; 2.2.2.1 Treaty-Making Competences Regarding Foreign Investment Before Lisbon: Member State BITs and the ECT as a Treaty of 'Shared Mixity'
2.2.2.2 Treaty-Making Competence Regarding Foreign Investment After Lisbon: EU-Only or 'Shared Mixity' as the Crossroads for Post-Lisbon IIPAs2.3 International Obligations of the EU and the Member States Under EU IIPAs; 2.3.1 Apportionment of Obligations Between the EU and the Member States Under Mixed IIPAs Along Competence Lines; 2.3.1.1 Apportionment of Obligations Along Division of Competences Under Mixed Agreements Devoid of Contractual Delimitations; 2.3.1.1.1 ECJ Jurisprudence on Apportionment of Obligations Under Mixed Agreements Devoid of Contractual Delimitations.
2.3.1.1.2 No Synchronisation of the EU's and the Member States' International Legal Personality with Their Treaty-Making Competences2.3.1.1.3 A Treaty Party's Consent to Be Bound by a Treaty Is Generally Comprehensive and All-Encompassing; 2.3.1.1.4 The General Irrelevance of 'Internal Law' Under International Law; 2.3.1.1.5 The Exceptional Relevance of 'Internal Law' Pursuant to Article 46 VCLT/VCLT-IO; 2.3.1.1.5.1 The ECT and the Application of Article 46 VCLT-IO; 2.3.1.1.5.2 Post-Lisbon Mixed IIPAs and the Application of Article 46 VCLT.
2.3.1.1.6 Result: No Apportionment of Obligations Between EU and Member States Along Competence Lines Under Mixed IIPAs That Are Devoid of Delimitations2.3.1.1.7 Joint or Several Assumption of International Obligations Under Mixed IIPAs Devoid of Contractual Delimitations?; 2.3.1.2 Apportionment of Obligations Under Mixed IIPAs Along Competence Lines as Per Contractual Delimitations; 2.3.1.2.1 The Various Contractual Delimitation Tools That Link Obligations Under a Mixed Agreements to the Division of Competences; 2.3.1.2.1.1 The 'Carving Up' of the Mixed Agreement.
0
8
8
8
8
This book provides a comprehensive portrait of how international responsibility of the EU and the Member States is structured under the EU's international investment protection agreements. It analyses both the old regime as represented by the Energy Charter Treaty and the new regime as represented by the new EU investment treaties, such as CETA, TTIP, the EU-Singapore Agreement and the EU-Vietnam Agreement. The international responsibility of the EU, being a "special" international organisation, is in and of itself an important and challenging topic in public international law. However, in the context of international investment law, and especially with regard to the emerging new EU investment treaties, the topic is largely unexplored and represents new terrain. The book promotes the development of law in this area and provide a springboard for further research. The book puts forth the thesis that the determination of the EU or a Member State as respondent in a dispute under the new EU investment treaties has a substantive effect on the respondent's international responsibility. The international law effects of the respondent determination will surely be one of the central topics in future debates on the new EU investment treaties. The book further compares the EU regulation that allocates financial burdens between the EU and the Member States arising out of international investment disputes with the only other genuinely existing allocation system in federal states to date, namely that of Germany. The book finally reveals many shortcomings of the new EU responsibility regime in international investment law and provides some suggestions on how they can best be remedied.