Published on 3 July 2019 in Client Alerts
On 18 June 2019, the General Court of the European Union (“GCEU”) handed down its judgment in the case of Micula v. Romania and annulled the 2015 European Commission’s decision that the award rendered by an arbitral tribunal in 2013, obliging Romania to pay €178 million to the investors, constituted illegal State aid under European Union (“EU”) law and forbidding Romania from performing the arbitral award.
The arbitration case had been brought by five investors, including the Micula brothers, against Romania on the basis of Romania’s 2005 repeal of the incentives it had granted in 1998 under the Emergency Governance Ordinance (“EGO”) to certain investors in disfavoured regions. The repeal was part of Romania’s accession process to the European Union with a view to eliminating all forms of State aid in national legislation incompatible with the acquis communautaire.
In March 2015, the European Commission adopted the contested decision according to which partial payment of the award by Romania constituted illegal State aid. This decision required Romania to suspend further implementation or execution of the arbitral award.
In a judgment delivered on 18 June 2019, the GCEU held that the State aid measure by Romania was not incompatible with EU law. As the EGO incentives were repealed prior to Romania’s accession to the EU, the Commission had no competence to assess their unlawfulness in light of EU law, according to the GCEU. Thus, the State aid rules did not bind Romania prior to its accession to the EU.
The GCEU also held that the Commission had retroactively applied its powers and that it could not classify the measure at issue as State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
In light of the Sweden-Romania BIT, the GCEU distinguished the Micula case from the Achmea case. The GCEU held that the Micula arbitral tribunal was not bound to apply EU law to events occurring prior to Romania’s accession to the EU.
On this basis, the GCEU annulled the Commission’s contested decision in its entirety.
The GCEU’s decision is subject to appeal before the Court of Justice of the EU.
Over the past year, Volterra Fietta was hired by clients in multiple new, complex and ground-breaking disputes before international and domestic courts and tribunals. For those new cases which involve a precise damages figure (for example, not counting boundary disputes at the International Court of Justice), the combined total claim value exceeds USD 40,000,000,000 (forty
Learn more
Volterra Fietta is pleased to announce the launch of “Volterra Fietta PIL commentaries” a new monthly commentary series by the partners of the firm, beginning Monday, 26 January. The series will present perspectives of seasoned public international law professionals with unique practical experience advising and representing clients. The partners will address selected concepts, principles, and
Learn more
These include: In addition, Volterra Fietta has once again been ranked Band A/Tier 1 for Public International Law by both Chambers & Partners and the Legal 500. Robert Volterra’s practice, including at Volterra Fietta, has maintained these top rankings for almost 30 years. Volterra Fietta has also been highly ranked for International Arbitration by both
Learn more
随着中国不断强调双边投资协定在保护其对外投资中的重要作用,并鼓励中国投资者运用国际法机制来保障自身权益,Volterra Fietta 受邀为这一重要倡议作出贡献。
In the past couple of decades China has become the world’s biggest overseas investor. Chinese State-Owned-Enterprises and private businesses have spent trillions of dollars in foreign investments. Inevitably, disputes arise between Chinese companies and foreign governments and business counterparties.
Learn more