O poveste actuală de iubire şi ură: arbitrajul ICSID în mrejele dreptului UE. Particularităţile cazului Micula
A topical love and hate relationship: ICSID arbitration under the spell of EU Law. Particularities of the Micula Case.

Summary/Abstract: The interferences of different legal orders at an international level have high impact consequences, while it is difficult to predict and standardize frame-solutions to be used when such interferences may trigger contractual ruptures or disputes. A similar situation is basically found within the premise of the ICSID case Micula v. Romania. Briefly, the analysed issue has as main focus the rightfulness of the European Commission to interfere in the enforcement of an ICSID arbitral award rendered against Romania, taking into consideration the fact that the European Commission is not a signatory party of the Romania – Sweden Bilateral Investment Treaty, the non-compliance of which triggered the dispute arbitrated by ICSID in the Micula v. Romania case. In order to analyse this issue, it was necessary to briefly tackle the major juridical institutions traced at the level of the Micula case, juridical institutions such as state aid as regulated by the European Union, fundamental principles of ICSID Convention and bilateral investment treaties, namely legal certainty and legitimate expectations and, last but not least, the enforcement of an ICSID award.

• Details
• Contents