Insights & news

Quentin Declève authors article on the consequences of the Court of Justice's judgment in Achmea

  • 12/03/2019
  • News

In its judgment in Achmea, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that an investor-State arbitration (ISDS) clause in a bilateral investment treaty (BIT) concluded between two EU Member States is contrary to the principle of the autonomy of the EU legal order (judgment of 6 March 2018, Case C-284/16).

In his article, Van Bael & Bellis associate Quentin Declève suggests that the Achmea judgment could have implications for the validity, not only of ISDS clauses in intra-EU BITs, but also of ISDS and applicable law clauses in BITs and other agreements concluded by the EU (or its Member States) with third countries.

The article was published (on-line) in the European Papers and is part of a forthcoming issue dedicated to the Achmea judgment. It is accessible here.

Key contacts

Related insights

Sign up for updates
    • 05/08/2019
    • Newsletters

    VBB on Belgian Business Law, Volume 2019, No. 07

    The July 2019 issue of our Belgian Business Law newsletter reporting on the latest developments in a range of areas, including competition, data protection, intellectual property and labour law.

    Read more
    • 09/07/2019
    • Newsletters

    VBB on Belgian Business Law, Volume 2019, No. 06

    The June 2019 issue of our Belgian Business Law newsletter reporting on the latest developments in a range of areas, including competition, data protection, intellectual property and labour law. Please click below to read the issue.

    Read more
    • 14/06/2019
    • News

    Andreas Reindl speaks on “SEPs, FRAND, and EU Competition Law” at the Workshop on Big Data and Anti-Monopoly in Beijing

    On 7 June 2019, Van Bael & Bellis partner Andreas Reindl spoke at the Workshop on Big Data and Anti-Monopoly in Beijing before an audience consisting mainly of members of China’s judiciary. Andreas discussed in particular under what circumstances EU competition law may limit the right of SEP holders to obtain injunctive relief against implementers when the parties have failed to enter into a FRAND license agreement, emphasizing that courts may still grant an injuction if they find that the implementer has not negotiated in good faith.

    Read more

Subscribe to our updates

Please select the practice areas you are interested in: *