Global Arbitration Review has published an analysis addressing the evolving orientations in intra-EU investment arbitration following the Achmea judgment, titled "Post-Achmea landscape: evolving orientations in intra-EU investment arbitration."

The Achmea decision, handed down by the Court of Justice of the European Union on 6 March 2018 in Case C-284/16 (Slovak Republic v. Achmea BV), held that an arbitration clause in a bilateral investment treaty between EU member states was incompatible with EU law. That ruling upended the basis for investor-state arbitration between investors and member states within the European Union.

The GAR analysis surveys how practice has developed since that judgment. According to the publication, orientations in intra-EU investment arbitration continue to evolve as tribunals, courts, and parties confront the consequences of the ruling for pending cases, enforcement proceedings, and the treatment of intra-EU bilateral investment treaties.

The full analysis is available to Global Arbitration Review subscribers. The source material provided for this item contains the headline and publication name only; readers requiring the substantive detail of the analysis should consult the original article directly.

What this means for practitioners

For counsel with investor clients holding intra-EU BIT claims, or with member-state respondents facing them, the piece signals that the doctrinal and procedural fallout from Achmea remains unsettled. Practitioners should verify the current status of any specific tribunal decision, set-aside proceeding, or enforcement action before advising clients, as this summary cannot report findings not contained in the available source data.