Among the many changes introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon, one of the most significant ones is the introduction of a new EU exclusive competence concerning foreign investment, as part of the common commercial policy. The exercise of such competence has given rise to several controversial issues, in particular as regards the status and the future of Member States Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) concluded before the attribution of this new competence to the EU. This article considers whether Member States BITs can be safeguarded by an application by analogy of Article 351 TFEU, in the same manner as pre-accession agreements. The analysis will include but extend beyond Regulation No. 1219/2012, which attempts to provide a sound legal regime of a transitory period only.

The issue of competence division is of fundamental importance as it reflects the 'power bargain' struck between the Member States and their Union, determining the limits of the authority of the EU as well as the limits of the authority of the Member States. It defines the nature of the EU as a polity, as well as the identity of the Member States. After over six years since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, it is high time to take stock of whether the reforms that were adopted to make the Union's system of division of competences between the EU Member States clearer, more coherent, and better at containing European integration, have been successful. This book asks whether 'the competence problem' has finally been solved. Given the fundamental importance of this question, this publication will be of interest to a wide audience, from constitutional and substantive EU law scholars to practitioners in the EU institutions and EU legal practice more generally.

A collection of essays that surveys the development and structure of the European Union's constitutional regime for foreign affairs.

The volume brings together academics and practitioners from across the EU to address the question of ‘facultative mixity’ in the EU’s external relations, i.e. the situation whereby both the EU and its Member States enter into an international agreement with a third country even if legally the EU could act on its own.

Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) provides that the EU will accede to the system of human rights protection of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Protocol No 9 in the Treaty of Lisbon opens the way for accession. This represents a major change in the relationship between two organisations that have co-operated closely in the past, though the ECHR has hitherto exercised only an indirect constitutional control over the EU legal order through scrutiny of EU Member States. The accession of the EU to the ECHR is expected to put an end to the informal dialogue, and allegedly also competition between the two regimes in Europe and to establish formal (both normative and institutional) hierarchies. In this new era, some old problems will be solved and new ones will appear. Questions of autonomy and independence, of attribution and allocation of responsibility, of co-operation, and legal pluralism will all arise, with consequences for the protection of human rights in Europe. This book seeks to understand how relations between the two organisations are likely to evolve after accession, and whether this new model will bring more coherence in European human rights protection. The book analyses from several different, yet interconnected, points of view and relevant practice the draft Accession Agreement, shedding light on future developments in the ECHR and beyond. Contributions in the book span classic public international law, EU law and the law of the ECHR, and are written by a mix of legal and non-legal experts from academia and practice.

International investment law is a subject of growing importance and complexity. Anyone interested in international investment law will appreciate the comprehensive, thoughtful and detailed exploration of this area which this distinguished group of German scholars have provided.