Dear readers, thank you for your interest in this blog during the last year! Let me start 2017 by wishing all of you a happy New Year, both professionally and privately. Also, I would like to take the opportunity to look back at 2016. Continue reading
Vattenfall’s challenge to Germany’s opt-out from nuclear power is getting a lot of public attention. Vattenfall’s earlier case aganist Germany, commenced in 2009 over environmental restrictions for a coal-fired power plant in Hamburg, is often cited as an example that investment treaty arbitration lacks transparency. Not so this time: Last week, ICSID announced that the parties have agreed to make the hearing open to the public. Continue reading
With the year end in sight, I looked back at what posts you read most in 2013. The three main categories that Dispute Resolution Germany covers – arbitration, litigation and mediation – are all represented. Investment arbitration emerges as THE hot topic, with four entries in the top ten. Arbitration in total accounts for seven posts. Here are the top ten posts: Continue reading
Transparency in investment arbitration, thanks to Vattenfall suing Germany over the nuclear power exit, has become a topic in the mainstream business press. A recent piece in the business weekly Wirtschaftswoche talked about “back room justice” (“Justitia verzieht sich ins Hinterzimmer”), citing the “Toll Collect” arbitration as an example. “Toll Collect” is not technically a case of treaty arbitration, but a multi-billion dispute about a public-private partnership between the German government and Daimler, Telekom und Cofiroute.