Energy Luncheon: European State Aid vs. investment protection of the international Energy Charter Treaty: who has the final say?

09.06.2016 EU law

On Thursday 9 June 2016 Stibbe will hold an energy luncheon "European State aid vs. investment protection of the international Energy Charter Treaty: Who has the final say?" presented by Cees Verburg.

Energy investments in Europe are relatively well-protected against the fickleness of the host states. But what if a host state’s actions are considered to be illegal state aid and the host state consequently retracts the agreements it made? Is it still possible to protect your business and the agreements you have with the host state on the basis of the Energy Charter Treaty? Recent claims have raised these questions along with this one: “How should the Energy Charter Treaty be interpreted?” In other words, how are the investment protection rules of the Energy Charter Treaty applied? And what does it potentially mean for protection of energy investments in EU countries? 

Mr. Cees Verburg is a PhD Researcher at the Groningen Centre of Energy Law (the Netherlands). He has been working on an analysis of the interaction between EU Law (mainly on state aid law) and the Energy Charter Treaty. The Energy Charter Treaty is known as the multilateral framework for energy cooperation under international law, focusing on the protection of foreign investments, reliable cross-border energy transit flows, and the resolution of disputes between participating states or – more commonly – between investors and host states. Recently, an important ruling has been rendered in a case between investors and a European host state, which is partly criticized by Mr. Verburg.

This exclusive Stibbe Energy Luncheon offers a unique presentation by Mr. Verburg about his findings on this case. He will present an interesting opinion about the hierarchy of EU competition law and the Energy Charter Treaty.

Lunch will be offered.

For more information and registration, please click here.

Kindly note that this seminar will be held in Dutch.

Related news

16.02.2018 EU law
Who is a consumer? The dynamic approach to the concept of 'consumer' under the Brussels I Regulation

Short Reads - On 25 January 2018, the European Court of Justice ("ECJ") rendered a preliminary ruling in a case between Austrian citizen Maximilian Schrems and online social network Facebook. The ruling is important for two reasons. First, the ECJ approved a dynamic approach to the concept of 'consumer' under the Brussels I Regulation. Secondly, the ECJ clarified that the special consumer forum can only be invoked by the specific consumer who is party to the contractual relationship with the professional trader.

Read more

01.02.2018 EU law
Qualifying dawn raid documents as 'in scope' or 'out of scope': marginal review by Belgian Court

Short Reads - On 13 December 2017, the Brussels Court of Appeal rendered a judgment clarifying the qualification 'in scope' and 'out of scope' of documents seized by the Belgian Competition Authority (BCA) during dawn raids at the applicants' (Distripaints NV and Novelta NV) premises. The dawn raids were launched after a complaint by SA Durieu Coatings, which accused both distributors of colluding with its competitor Akzo Nobel.

Read more

01.02.2018 EU law
Highest German Court rules that ASICS's ban on using price comparison websites violates EU competition law

Short Reads - On 19 January 2018, the German Federal Court of Justice (FCJ) published its judgment concerning an appeal brought by shoe manufacturer ASICS against a fining decision. The FCJ ruled that ASICS had infringed competition law by prohibiting its retailers from participating in price comparison websites. The judgment confirms the strict approach of German courts relating to vertical online sales restrictions.  

Read more

01.02.2018 EU law
Participation d’entreprises liées aux marchés publics: qui assume la responsabilité ?

Articles - L’avocat général Campos Sanchez-Bordona a récemment déposé des conclusions intéressante dans le cadre de l’affaire nr. C-531/A6 dont la Cour de justice a été saisie. Selon l’avocat général, des soumissionnaires qui sont liés mais qui présentent chacun une offre séparée pour un marché public déterminé n’ont pas à informer le pouvoir adjudicateur des liens existant entre eux. Il ressort en outre des conclusions que le pouvoir adjudicateur n’est pas légalement tenu de vérifier de manière active la participation d’entreprises liées à un marché public.

Read more

01.02.2018 EU law
Dissemination of misleading information on the safety of a medical product can be a "by object" infringement

Short Reads - On 23 January 2018, the European Court of Justice delivered its judgment on a request for a preliminary ruling by the Italian Council of State. The request concerned an agreement between Roche and Novartis to make public statements concerning the alleged lack of safety and efficacy of one of Roche's products which competed with a product licensed to Novartis (the Agreement). The Court of Justice found that such an agreement can, under specific circumstances, constitute a restriction of competition "by object".

Read more

Our website uses cookies: third party analytics cookies to best adapt our website to your needs & cookies to enable social media functionalities. For more information on the use of cookies, please check our Privacy and Cookie Policy. Please note that you can change your cookie opt-ins at any time via your browser settings.

Privacy and Cookie Policy