header-logo header-logo

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?

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll