Ioan Micula, Viorel Micula, S.C. European Food S.A, S.C. Starmill S.R.L. and S.C. Multipack S.R.L. v. Romania, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/20, Final Award, 11 December 2013 - European Investment Law and Arbitration Review View Ioan Micula, Viorel Micula, S.C. European Food S.A, S.C. Starmill S.R.L. and S.C. Multipack S.R.L. v. Romania, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/20, Final Award, 11 December 2013 by - European Investment Law and Arbitration Review Ioan Micula, Viorel Micula, S.C. European Food S.A, S.C. Starmill S.R.L. and S.C. Multipack S.R.L. v. Romania, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/20, Final Award, 11 December 2013 2 1

The Micula brothers, Ioan and Viorel, together with three companies that they control, brought ICSID proceedings against Romania in July 2005. An ICSID Tribunal rendered its final decision on 11 December 2013, granting the claimants damages of RON 376,433,229 (equivalent to us$116 million) plus interest accruing until full satisfaction of the Award. The claimants have to date brought at least six sets of enforcement proceedings against Romania all over the world, none of which have yet reached fruitful final conclusion. The conflict between the EU legal order and the ICSID regime, as to the enforcement of awards, has manifested itself in the six different sets of enforcement proceedings. The aim of this case note is to provide an overview of the competition law dimension to the ICSID proceedings in the Micula case. The European Commission’s involvement in the Micula case, including its decision prohibiting Romania from fulfilling the ICSID award and the Commission’s intervention in the ICSID and subsequent enforcement proceedings is also examined. This case note concludes with the observation that The CJEU is due to issue a couple of decisions in the coming months, which could signpost the way for investors to enforce ICSID awards, when these involve the application of intra-EU BITs.

European Investment Law and Arbitration Review