Conceptualisation and Application of the Principle of Autonomy of EU Law

The CJEU’s Judgement in Achmea Put in Perspective

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Resumé

It seemed that Court of Justice of the European Union wanted to make it short and sweet: It took the Grand Chamber in its Achmea judgement less than fifteen pages to conclude that Investor-State dispute settlement in an intra-EU context is incompatible with EU law.

The Judgement is noteworthy in terms of both the conceptualisation as well as the application of the principle of autonomy of EU law. In terms of conceptualisation of the principle, what we witness in Achmea, read in conjunction with another decision, could be a first subtle attempt to enrich the principle with notions of the rule of law. In terms of application, the Court further strengthens legal equality, its judicial monopoly, and – perhaps even more importantly – the role of the Member States’ courts, understood as “traditional permanent State courts”, in the judicial dialogue.
OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftEuropean Law Review
Vol/bind3
Antal sider18
ISSN0307-5400
StatusUdgivet - jun. 2019

Fingeraftryk

European Law
autonomy
court of justice
constitutional state
monopoly
chamber
witness
investor
equality
EU
dialogue

Citer dette

@article{bc2d3313d0a5443e84ca022f4df47eaa,
title = "Conceptualisation and Application of the Principle of Autonomy of EU Law: The CJEU’s Judgement in Achmea Put in Perspective",
abstract = "It seemed that Court of Justice of the European Union wanted to make it short and sweet: It took the Grand Chamber in its Achmea judgement less than fifteen pages to conclude that Investor-State dispute settlement in an intra-EU context is incompatible with EU law.The Judgement is noteworthy in terms of both the conceptualisation as well as the application of the principle of autonomy of EU law. In terms of conceptualisation of the principle, what we witness in Achmea, read in conjunction with another decision, could be a first subtle attempt to enrich the principle with notions of the rule of law. In terms of application, the Court further strengthens legal equality, its judicial monopoly, and – perhaps even more importantly – the role of the Member States’ courts, understood as “traditional permanent State courts”, in the judicial dialogue.",
keywords = "cjeu, achema, autonomy, isds, intra-EU BITs, investment arbitration",
author = "Steffen Hindelang",
year = "2019",
month = "6",
language = "English",
volume = "3",
journal = "European Law Review",
issn = "0307-5400",
publisher = "Sweet & Maxwell Ltd.",

}

Conceptualisation and Application of the Principle of Autonomy of EU Law : The CJEU’s Judgement in Achmea Put in Perspective. / Hindelang, Steffen.

I: European Law Review, Bind 3, 06.2019.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Conceptualisation and Application of the Principle of Autonomy of EU Law

T2 - The CJEU’s Judgement in Achmea Put in Perspective

AU - Hindelang, Steffen

PY - 2019/6

Y1 - 2019/6

N2 - It seemed that Court of Justice of the European Union wanted to make it short and sweet: It took the Grand Chamber in its Achmea judgement less than fifteen pages to conclude that Investor-State dispute settlement in an intra-EU context is incompatible with EU law.The Judgement is noteworthy in terms of both the conceptualisation as well as the application of the principle of autonomy of EU law. In terms of conceptualisation of the principle, what we witness in Achmea, read in conjunction with another decision, could be a first subtle attempt to enrich the principle with notions of the rule of law. In terms of application, the Court further strengthens legal equality, its judicial monopoly, and – perhaps even more importantly – the role of the Member States’ courts, understood as “traditional permanent State courts”, in the judicial dialogue.

AB - It seemed that Court of Justice of the European Union wanted to make it short and sweet: It took the Grand Chamber in its Achmea judgement less than fifteen pages to conclude that Investor-State dispute settlement in an intra-EU context is incompatible with EU law.The Judgement is noteworthy in terms of both the conceptualisation as well as the application of the principle of autonomy of EU law. In terms of conceptualisation of the principle, what we witness in Achmea, read in conjunction with another decision, could be a first subtle attempt to enrich the principle with notions of the rule of law. In terms of application, the Court further strengthens legal equality, its judicial monopoly, and – perhaps even more importantly – the role of the Member States’ courts, understood as “traditional permanent State courts”, in the judicial dialogue.

KW - cjeu

KW - achema

KW - autonomy

KW - isds

KW - intra-EU BITs

KW - investment arbitration

M3 - Journal article

VL - 3

JO - European Law Review

JF - European Law Review

SN - 0307-5400

ER -