Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
The tensions between European Union (EU) law and intra-EU bilateral investment treaties (BITs) have become increasingly visible: they involve national and transnational courts, arbitral tribunals and courts in third states, and arise in a variety of procedural settings and with increasing intensity. Written at a time when questions about the very foundations of the interactions between EU and intra-EU BITs have been raised before the Court of Justice of the European Union, this article highlights the legal and policy factors that may explain the intensity of the current dilemmas. It reflects on the maximalist and polemical approach that a number of actors have adopted over the years, and points out the pitfalls of ignoring the usefulness of pragmatism and comity.
Journal of World Investment and Trade – Brill
Published: Nov 24, 2016
Keywords: comity; European Union; Court of Justice of the European Union; intra-EU BITs; maximalism; Micula case
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.