Nuclear Phase-Out put to the test

Background to the new dispute Vattenfall v. Germany (II)

8 October 2013
Nathalie Bernasconi-Osterwalder & Rhea Tamara Hoffmann

Swedish energy company Vattenfall filed request for arbitration at the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), after Germany’s decision to phase out nuclear energy.

In May 2012 the Swedish energy company Vattenfall filed a request for arbitration against Germany at the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), housed at the World Bank in Washington, D.C., because of Germany’s decision to phase out nuclear energy.

Vattenfall relies on its rights under the Energy Charter Treaty, an international trade and investment agreement in the energy sector.

This treaty, like many international investment agreements, grants foreign investors the right to bypass the domestic courts of the host country and to directly file a complaint to an ad hoc international tribunal to challenge proposed government regulations. Vattenfall claims over €3,7 billion in compensation in response to the closure of the nuclear power plants Krümmel and Brunsbüttel.

This article sets out to assist interested members of the public and policy-makers to better understand this particular case and the investment law and policy it relies on. We will first provide the background on the conflict (including the first 2009–2011 Vattenfall v. Germany arbitration) and the central elements of international investment law that Vattenfall is likely to call into play.

We also provide a comparison with the domestic legal situation by looking into the pending review of the constitutionality of the nuclear phase-out. Finally, we briefly address a number of fundamental issues and needs for reform that come to the fore in the relationship between international investment protection law (including arbitration) and public policy-making.

October 2013
In: The German Nuclear Phase-Out Put to the Test in International Investment Arbitration? [PDF, 340KB]
8 pages

Recent publications from Trade & Investment

BRICS: A Global Trade Power in a Multipolar World

The BRICS have played an important role at moments in slowing down neoliberal trade policy, but do not depart from a global trade model that has yielded great profits for a few major transnational companies and witnessed a race to the bottom in term of wages, working conditions, and environmental protection.

Land grabbing under the Cover of Law

The BRICS are following the pattern traditionally adopted by Northern countries of enclosing and exploiting land, both nationally and abroad, to benefit capital and global agro-industrialisation. They are also using law and diplomacy, notably Bilateral Investment Agreements, in order to facilitate access to foreign land, and foster their own economic interests.

EU-Myanmar Bilateral Investment Treaty

In March 2014 the European Commission received the negotiation mandate from the EU member States to start negotiating an Investment treaty with Myanmar. But what do BITS mean in practice? Is it in the best interest of the Myanmar public?

Feiten of Fabels

Over TTIP wordt veel geschreven, wat zijn nu de feiten en wat zijn de fabels?