Harmful effect of arbitration dispute settlement EU intra bits to the legal order of the European Union

Vukadinović, Radovan D.

doi:10.5937/AnaliPFB1703050V

Akcije

dodaj u Moj izbor [0]

kako citirati ovaj članak
prikaži na oba jezika
podeli ovaj članak

Direktan link

Metrika

citati u SCIndeksu: 0
citati u CrossRef-u:0
citati u Google Scholaru:[]
posete u poslednjih 30 dana:10
preuzimanja u poslednjih 30 dana:7

Sadržaj

članak: 1 od 17

povratak na rezultate

Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu

2017, vol. 65, br. 3, str. 50-69

Štetno dejstvo arbitražnog rešavanja sporova iz internih sporazuma Evropske unije o zaštiti stranih investicija na pravni poredak Evropske unije

Vukadinović Radovan D.

Univerzitet u Kragujevcu, Pravni fakultet

e-adresa: radevuk2010@gmail.com

Ključne reči: zaštita investicija; bilateralni sporazum; načelo autonomije; načelo pravnog jedinstva; mehanizam rešavanja sporova između države i investitora

Sažetak

Zaštita stranih investicija se, po pravilu, obezbeđuje bilateralnim sporazumima o zaštiti stranih investicija (BIT) koje zaključuju zainteresovane države. U njima se stranim investitorima pružaju materijalnopravne i procesnopravne garancije. U materijalnom smislu, stranim investitorima se garantuje standard zaštite protiv direktne i indirektne eksproprijacije. U procesnom smislu, nudi im se mogućnost da protiv države domaćina neposredno pokrenu arbitražni postupak, tj. da koriste mehanizam za rešavanje sporova između država i investitora, koji se skraćeno označava kao ISDS mehanizam. ISDS mehanizam je u početku smatran efikasnim načinom da se prevaziđe nepoverenje u nepristrasnost sudova države domaćina. Praksa je, međutim, pokazala da su arbitražni tribunali često širokim tumačenjem saglasnosti strana na ISDS mehanizam praktično širili svoju nadležnost i mogućnost da BIT-ove kvalifikuju kao međunarodne ugovore, čime je ponovo pokrenuto pitanje odnosa prava Evropske unije i međunarodnog prava. Arbitražnim odlukama, u kojima su prednost davali međunarodnom pravu, dovedeni su u pitanje jedinstvo prava EU i njegov autonomni karakter. Stoga je Evropska komisija smatrala da bi u tumačenju spornih odredaba BIT-ova prednost trebalo dati pravu EU i njihovu punovažnost ocenjivati u skladu sa pravom EU. Pitanje je posebno aktuelizovano nakon velikog talasa proširenja, 2004. godine, posebno kod tzv. internih BIT-ova. U radu autor polazi od teze da interni BIT-ovi kao međunarodni ugovori spadaju u izvore prava EU i da bi nadležnost za njihovo tumačenje trebalo poveriti Sudu pravde, kako se ne bi ugrozili jedinstvo pravnog poretka EU i njegov autonomni karakter. Sa tim ciljem je u uvodnom delu rada analizirana pravna priroda bilateralnih sporazuma kao izvora i okvira zaštite stranih investicija i njihovo mesto u pravu EU. U drugom delu su analizirani stavovi organa EU i investicionih arbitražnih tribunala i dejstvo arbitražnih odluka na načelo autonomije i pravno jedinstvo prava EU.

Abstract

The issue of interpreting and applying intra BITs, especially in cases where their solutions conflict with EU law or international law, are a reflection of the still unresolved relationship between EU law and international law. Despite the exceptional theoretical significance, the issue of hierarchy is, first and foremost, a political issue. The answer to it defines the legal nature of the EU and the direction of its further development: as a sui generis federal community or a regional community of a confederal type. In the legal theory, the opinion on sui generis and the autonomous legal order of the EU is prevalent. This was also confirmed by the Court of Justice in a series of cases. However, the analyzed decisions of investment arbitrations engaged on the basis of the ISDS mechanism call into question such a position. Arbiters believe that the rights and obligations of the BIT should be interpreted in accordance with the rules of international law and that, in the event of a conflict with EU law, priority should be given to the rules of international public law. For this reason, the European Commission and the Court of Justice only see the existence of ISDS clauses in the BITs as a threat to the preservation of the unity and autonomy of the EU legal order, because their activation is jeopardized by the 'interpretative monopoly' of the Court of Justice entrusted with the decision of previous issues to ensure unity of rights EU. The fact that the question of the effect of the ISDS mechanism is not only of theoretical importance is testified by the fact that the EU negotiations on a new generation of trade and investment agreements are examining proposals to establish a more democratic and transparent multilateral international judicial mechanism in place of the existing mechanism.

	Reference
	*** (2003) UNCTAD dispute settlement: 2.3. Consent to arbitration. UNCTAD/EDM/Misc.232/Add.2
	Barents, R. (2004) The Autonomy of Community Law. The Hague: Kluwer Law International
1	Basedow, J. (2015) EU law in international arbitration: Referrals to the European Court of Justice. Journal of International Arbitration, 32(4)
	Billiet, J. (2016) International investment arbitration: A practical handbook. Maklu
	Bockstiegel, K.-H. (2012) Commercial and Investment Arbitration: How Different are they Today?: The Lalive Lecture 2012. Arbitration International, 28(4): 577-590
	Borovikov, E., Evtimov, B., Crevon-Tarassova, A. (2016) The international arbitration review. European Union, 7th ed. June (ed. J. H. Carter), Ch. 15, 190
	Carrie, E.A. (2010) Bilateral Investment Treaties and the EU Legal Order: Implications of the Lisbon Treaty. Brooklyn Journal of International Law, 35
	Casteleiro, D.A. Four cases for 2015(III): Case T-646/14, Micula v. Commission - State aids and international dispute settlement systems. https://delilawblog.wordpress.com/2015/02/06/andresdelgado-casteleiro-four-cases-for-2015-iii-case-t-64614-miculav-commission-state-aids-and-international-dispute-settlementsystems
	Cole, T., i dr. (2015) Legal instruments and practice of arbitration in the EU: Study. EP-Directorate General for Internal Policies-Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs-Legal Affairs, Study, PE 509.988 (IPOL_STU(2015)509988), http://www.europarl.europa.eu/studies
	Czuczai, J. (2012) The Autonomy of the EU Legal Order and the Law-making Activities of International Organizations: Some Examples Regarding the Council's most Recent Practice. Yearbook of European Law, 31(1): 452-472
1	Ćirić, A.Lj., Cvetković, P.N. (2014) Karakteristike pravnog režima stranih direktnih investicija u pravu EU. Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Nišu, br. 68, str. 679-696
	de Witte, B. (2010) European Union Law: How Autonomous is its Legal Order?. Zeitschrift für öffentliches Recht, 65(1): 141-155
	Dolzer, R. The impact of international investment treaties on domestic administrative law. http://www.iilj.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Dolzer-The-Impact-of-International-Investment-Treaties-on-Domestic-Administrative-Law-2005.pdf
4	Đundić, P. (2013) Pristanak države na arbitražu sa stranim ulagačem - modaliteti pristanka, ograničenja i merodavno pravo. Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta, Novi Sad, vol. 47, br. 3, str. 359-375
	Eckes, C. (2016) International rulings and the EU legal order: Autonomy as legitimacy?. CLEER Papers, 2
	Jovanović, Z.M. (2014) Odgovornost države za zaštitu stranih direktnih ulaganja. Beograd: Pravni fakultet, doktorska teza
	Kirchmair, L. (2012) The ‘Janus Face' of the Court of Justice of the European Union: A theoretical appraisal of the EU legal order's relationship with international and member state law. Goettingen Journal of International Law, 4
	Latek, M. (2014) European Parliamentary Research Service, 13071REV2, Briefing 21/01, 1. http://www.eprs.ep.parl.union.eu
	Lukić, D.M. (2013) Autonomija prava Evropske unije u svetlu novije prakse evropskih sudova. Beograd, disertacija
	Martin, A.W., i dr. (2015) International Investment Agreements (IIAs): Frequently asked questions. Congressional Research Service, May 15, 2015, https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44015.pdf
	Molnar, T. (2016) The Concept of Autonomy of EU Law from the Comparative Perspective of International Law and the Legal Systems of Member States (August 15, 2015). u: Hungarian Yearbook of International Law and European Law 2015, The Hague: Eleven International Publishing
	Odermatt, J. (2016) When a Fence Becomes a Cage: The Principle of Autonomy in EU External Relations Law. EUI Working Papers, , MWP 2016/07, Max Weber Programme
5	Rakić, B.M. (2009) Fragmentacija međunarodnog prava i evropsko pravo - na zapadu nešto novo. Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu, vol. 57, br. 1, str. 122-147
	Rosas, A. (2011) The status in EU law of international agreements concluded by EU member states. Fordham International Law Journal, 34(5)
	Sahibli, T. The relationship of EU law and bilateral investment treaties. http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2: 903370/FULLTEXT01.pdf
1	Schreuer, C. (2008) Consent to arbitration. u: P. Muchlinski, F. Ortino, C [ur.] TheOxford Handbook of International Investment Law, Oxford: Schreuer
	Schreuer, C. (2014) Jurisdiction and Applicable Law in Investment Treaty Arbitration. McGill Journal of Dispute Resolution, 1, 1
1	Schreuer, C. (2009) The ICSID Convention, A Commentary. CUP
1	Shan, W., Zhang, S. (2010) The Treaty of Lisbon: Half Way toward a Common Investment Policy. European Journal of International Law, 21(4): 1049-1073
2	Stanivuković, M. (2007) Arbitraža između države i ulagača na osnovu dvostranih sporazuma o zaštiti i unapređenju ulaganja. u: Zbornik radova u spomen prof. dr Miodraga Trajkovića, Beograd
	Steingruber, M.A. (2009) Notion, nature and extent of consent in international arbitration. London, Thesis
1	Tsagourias, N. (2011) Conceptualizing the autonomy of the European Union. u: R. Collins, B. D. White [ur.] Institutional Independence in the International Legal Order, Oxford: International Organizations and the Idea of Autonomy
	van Rossem, W.J. (2013) The Autonomy of EU Law: More is Less?: Between Autonomy and Dependence. The EU Legal Order Under The Influence of International Organisations. The Hague: T.M.C. Asser Press-Springer
1	Vasiljević, M. (2014) Strana ulaganja u srpsku privredu i odgovornost države. u: V Radović [ur.] Usklađivanje poslovnog prava Srbije sa pravom Evropske unije, Beograd
	Vukadinović, R. (2007) Primena komunitarnog prava konkurencije u postupcima pred arbitražama i ustanovama sličnim arbitražama. Beograd: Liber Amicorum Dobrosav Mitrović
	Vukadinović, R., Vukadinović, M.J. (2016) Uvod u institucije i pravo Evropske unije. Kragujevac
	Wehland, H. (2009) Intra-eu investment agreements and arbitration: is European community law an obstacle?. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 58(02): 297
	Weiss, F., Steiner, S. (2013) The investment regime under Article 207 of the TFEU - a legal conundrum: the scope of 'foreign direct investment' and the future of intra-EU BITs. u: Baetens, Freya; Baetens, Freya [ur.] Investment Law within International Law, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, str. 355-374
	Wessel, A.R., Blockmans, S. (2013) Between Autonomy and Dependence: The EU Legal Order Under the Influence of International Organisations: An Introduction, Between Autonomyand Dependence. The EU Legal Order Under The Influence of International Organisations. The Hague: T.M.C. Asser Press-Springer

O članku

jezik rada: srpski
vrsta rada: neklasifikovan
DOI: 10.5937/AnaliPFB1703050V
objavljen u SCIndeksu: 05.10.2017.

Povezani članci

Nema povezanih članaka