CYIL vol. 12 (2021)

Miriama Kiselyova CYIL 12 (2021) THE KOMSTROY JUDGMENT AND ITS POSSIBLE IMPLICATIONS Miriama Kiselyova 1 Abstract: This article describes and analyses the Komstroy v Moldova with a focus on the jurisdiction and findings on the inapplicability of investment arbitration under the Energy Charter Treaty within the EU. The Article further deliberates the possible implementation of the Komstroy judgment, with a retrospective on the implementation of the Achmea judgment, including reference to selected case law post Achmea. In its third part, the Article shortly analyses the potential spillover effect of the Komstroy judgment on arbitration outside the EU, followed by a comparison with the Opinion 1/17 to test the consistency of the CJ EU case law. In the final part, the article brings the latest news on the modernisation of the Energy Charter treaty and concludes with a short outline of potential new instruments for crossborder investment protection in the EU. Resumé: Tento článok popisuje a analyzuje rozsudok Komstroy v Moldavsko so zameraním na právomoc a zistenia o neaplikovateľnosti investičnej arbitráže podľa Zmluvy o Energe- tickej Charte v rámci EÚ. Tento článok ďalej pojednáva možnej implementácii rozsudku Komstroy so spätnou účinnosťou o rozsudku Achmea vrátane odkazu na vybranú judikatú- ru post Achmea. Vo svojej tretej časti článok stručne analyzuje potenciálny vplyv rozsudku Komstroy na arbitráž mimo EÚ, po ktorom nasleduje porovnanie so Stanoviskom EU 1/17, na preskúmanie konzistentnosti judikatúry Súdneho dvora EÚ. V záverečnej časti článok prináša najnovšie správy o modernizácii zmluvy o Energetickej charte a nakoniec uvádza stručný prehľad potenciálnych nových nástrojov na ochranu cezhraničných investícií v EÚ. Key words: Komstroy v. Moldova, Case C‑741/19, the Energy Charter Treaty, international investment arbitration, About the author: Miriama Kiselyova is an investment expert and legal adviser at the Permanent Representation of the Slovak Republic to the EU. Her portfolio includes investment protection, investment facilitation, investment screening, treaty negotiation, international investment arbitration and CJ EU cases related to investment protection, representation before EU institutions (Trade Policy Committee) and before international organisations (UNCITRAL reform of ISDS, the Energy Charter Treaty modernisation, OECD Investment Committee, UNCTAD). She is a PhD candidate at the Charles University in the field of public international law. Introduction On 2 September the CJ EU issued the judgment Komstroy v Moldova 2 . The underlying investment dispute based on the Energy Charter Treaty (the ECT) has had its origins outside 1 The author wishes to underline that this article expresses her personal opinions and shall not be attributed to the Slovak Republic. 2 Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) dated 2 September 2021 in Case C‑741/19, Request for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU from the cour d’appel de Paris (France), made by decision of 24 September 2019, received at the Court on 8 October 2019, in the proceedings. Republic of Moldova v Komstroy LLC, successor in law to the company Energoalians (Judgment Komstroy).

416