In Commission v Hungary, the CJEU found that Hungary failed to fulfil its obligations under EU law by restricting EU investors’ rights. This Perspective considers what the judgment means for the future of intra-EU investment protection, and whether it will approximate the level of protection currently enjoyed under investor-state arbitration
In March 2018, the European Court of Justice rendered its Achmea judgment, by which the Court consid...
CEE states, following their accession into the European Union in 2004 and 2007, have been inundated ...
The paper presents, in an analytical manner, Hungary’s legal experiences with international investme...
In the much-awaited Achmea judgment (of 6 March 2018, case C-284/16 [GC]), the Court of Justice held...
This Perspective suggests that intra-EU BITs do not violate the principle of autonomy of the EU lega...
A dramatic upheaval in investor-state arbitration last year recently led to the apparent demise of i...
The EU is the world’s leading host and source of foreign investment. In the light of the current sit...
Western Europe can be considered the birthplace of the current international investment protection r...
By its landmark ruling on 6 March 2018 in the Achmea case, the European Court of Justice considered ...
By its landmark ruling on 6 March 2018 in the Achmea case, the European Court of Justice considered ...
It seemed that Court of Justice of the European Union wanted to make it short and sweet: It took the...
Questions arise as to what will happen when a foreign investor sues a Member State or even the EU, g...
The European Commission believes that intra-EU BITs are not necessary, since the EU single market ru...
Předmětem tohoto článku je analýza rozhodnutí CJEU ve věci Achmea z pohledu objektivu zákona o přímý...
In the much-awaited Achmea judgment (of 6 March 2018, case C-284/16 [GC]), the Court of Justice held...
In March 2018, the European Court of Justice rendered its Achmea judgment, by which the Court consid...
CEE states, following their accession into the European Union in 2004 and 2007, have been inundated ...
The paper presents, in an analytical manner, Hungary’s legal experiences with international investme...
In the much-awaited Achmea judgment (of 6 March 2018, case C-284/16 [GC]), the Court of Justice held...
This Perspective suggests that intra-EU BITs do not violate the principle of autonomy of the EU lega...
A dramatic upheaval in investor-state arbitration last year recently led to the apparent demise of i...
The EU is the world’s leading host and source of foreign investment. In the light of the current sit...
Western Europe can be considered the birthplace of the current international investment protection r...
By its landmark ruling on 6 March 2018 in the Achmea case, the European Court of Justice considered ...
By its landmark ruling on 6 March 2018 in the Achmea case, the European Court of Justice considered ...
It seemed that Court of Justice of the European Union wanted to make it short and sweet: It took the...
Questions arise as to what will happen when a foreign investor sues a Member State or even the EU, g...
The European Commission believes that intra-EU BITs are not necessary, since the EU single market ru...
Předmětem tohoto článku je analýza rozhodnutí CJEU ve věci Achmea z pohledu objektivu zákona o přímý...
In the much-awaited Achmea judgment (of 6 March 2018, case C-284/16 [GC]), the Court of Justice held...
In March 2018, the European Court of Justice rendered its Achmea judgment, by which the Court consid...
CEE states, following their accession into the European Union in 2004 and 2007, have been inundated ...
The paper presents, in an analytical manner, Hungary’s legal experiences with international investme...