This article follows recent developments in the intra-EU investment
arbitration case-law after the publication of the CJEU’s judgment in Slovak
Republic v Achmea BV (Achmea judgment) and the subsequent
signing of the so-called ‘Achmea declarations’ on 15 and 16 January 2019 and
the Agreement for the Termination of Bilateral Investment Treaties Between the
EU Member States on 5 May 2020 (Termination Agreement). Although the decisions
of investment tribunals analysed in this article show that all tribunals uniformly
dismissed the jurisdictional objection of the respondent States based on the
CJEU’s conclusions in the Achmea judgment, this article
explores the very different reasons adopted by the tribunals when doing so, and
the potential challenges ahead, especially once the Termination Agreement
enters into ‘full’ force. Based on different approaches taken by the tribunals
with regard to the applicability of the Achmea judgment, this
article addresses its implications separately for ECT arbitrations, ICSID arbitrations
and BIT arbitrations, while drawing attention to the important similarities and
differences between the decisions.