Case Study Of The Arbitration Award Revocation Of Achmea V.Slovakia

In recent years,the status and validity of bilateral investment treaties within the EU have aroused fierce debate in Europe,which culminated in the recent controversial judgment of the European Court of justice on Achmea.Based on the consideration of maintaining the "autonomy" of EU law,the court tends to deny the role of multilateral investment treaties or restrictions on the rules of customary international law in judicial review.Starting with the basic facts of Achmea v.Slovakia,this paper analyzes the dispute focus of this case through the objection of Slovakia in the arbitration stage and the appeal reason of applying for cancellation of the arbitration award.Then,combining the historical background of the conflict between bilateral investment treaties and EU laws and the origin of the principle of EU legal autonomy,it analyzes the rationality of the judgment of the EU Court of justice in this case It reveals that the BIT dispute settlement mechanism between China and EU Member States is at risk of being interpreted unfavorably by EU,and finally provides reasonable suggestions for China to cope with the changes of EU International Investment Rules.This paper consists of four parts:The first part is the basic situation of the case,mainly including the basic reasons of Achmea v.Slovakia investment arbitration case and the development process of the case.At the same time,according to the advisory opinion of the assistant judge of the European Court of justice and the demonstration process of the judgment of the European Court of Justice,it combs out the dispute focus of the case.The second part briefly introduces the judicial review mechanism of the international investment arbitration and the legal basis of the cancellation procedure of the arbitration award in this case,and then analyzes the public policy background of the EU international investment involved in this case.From the rise of the bilateral investment agreements in the European continent to the reform of the EU investment system by Lisbon treaty,the effectiveness conflicts of the bilateral investment agreements are caused.The third part starts with the definition of the dispute focus concept,analyzes the connotation,origin and determination standard of the autonomy of the European legal order,as well as the determination of the dispute focus made by the European Court in this case.The fourth part is the evaluation and analysis of the EU court’s determination of thefocus of the dispute in this case.It starts from two perspectives.One is to analyze whether the dispute matters of BIT involve the application of EU law,and the other is whether the dispute settlement mechanism of bit damages the distribution of EU judicial power system.The fifth part is the enlightenment to our country.It analyzes how to give the response plan of potential investment dispute between China and EU from the judgment logic of this case,and puts forward reasonable suggestions for China to deal with the reform plan of international investment dispute settlement mechanism that EU tries to lead.