header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
12 July 2024 / James Rogers , Jonathan P Cowe
Issue: 8079 / Categories: Features , International , Environment
printer mail-detail

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

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
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

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll