Achmea versus the Rule of Law: CJEU’s Dogmatic Dismissal of Investors’ Rights in Backsliding Member States of the European Union

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract (may include machine translation)

We demonstrate that the CJEU’s Achmea judgment has resulted in significantly more damage beyond the termination of intra-EU BITs. It made the application of EU law difficult, if not impossible. Indeed, it has opened the floodgate to deficient judicial protection in the face of structural backsliding of the rule of law in some EU Member States. While the motives of the CJEU and by extension the European Commission to safeguard their ultimate control over the internal market by exclusively relying on the preliminary ruling system of integrated European judiciary may be understandable, they cannot serve as a credible justification for the long-term consequences of disempowering investors in the name of an ideological stance regarding EU judiciary, which cannot work in the backsliding Member States, where the ‘integration of the EU’s judiciary’ could stand for the absence of independent adjudication. Consequently, the Achmea judgment and post-Achmea developments such as the recently signed Termination Agreement to terminate the intra-EU BITs have been leading to significant—possibly irreparable in the short- to medium-term—lowering of the procedural and substantive protection standards for European investors in times when they are in need of more rather than less protection.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)195-219
Number of pages25
JournalHague Journal on the Rule of Law
Volume14
Issue number2-3
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2022
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Achmea
  • Backsliding
  • CJEU
  • EU values
  • Judicial protection
  • Rule of law

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Achmea versus the Rule of Law: CJEU’s Dogmatic Dismissal of Investors’ Rights in Backsliding Member States of the European Union'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this