header-logo header-logo

Leaving the ECT: bad for investors, wrong for the climate?

12 July 2024 / James Rogers , Jonathan P Cowe
Issue: 8079 / Categories: Features , International , Environment
printer mail-detail
James Rogers & Jonathan P Cowe warn of the unintended consequences of leaving the Energy Charter Treaty
  • Explores the ramifications of the UK and EU’s decision to withdraw from the Energy Charter Treaty.
  • Argues withdrawal removes important legal protections for investments in the energy sector, deterring investment in renewables.

The Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) is an international multilateral agreement established in the 1990s to protect foreign investments in the energy sector. The treaty’s primary purpose is to ensure a stable and transparent investment environment by requiring member states to uphold principles of fair and equitable treatment of investments. It also prohibits the expropriation of investments without prompt compensation and includes a mechanism for investors to seek legal redress for breaches of these obligations via international arbitration. These protections cover all energy-related investments, from fossil fuels to renewable energy projects.

The treaty was a product of the 1990s wave of globalisation and efforts to facilitate East-West trade in energy, particularly oil and gas. Signatories to the ECT included

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll