Roland Lescure

Last week at #CERAWeek, I had the opportunity to join an insightful discussion on Energy and the Future of European Security, alongside Laurent Ruseckas, Maxim Timchenko, Laura Lochman, and Jovita Neliupšienė.   As Europe continues to navigate its energy transition, here are my three key messages:   - More LNG is coming – let the market do its work. The global LNG market is expanding rapidly, with the U.S. and other countries playing a crucial role. The best approach is to let markets function efficiently, sending the right signals for investment and diversification. Europe, including Uniper, is securing supply by building strong partnerships across the globe.   - Gas-fired power plants are essential for security and transition. Germany and Europe need significant new gas-fired capacity to ensure security of supply, while transitioning to a hydrogen-ready future. Policymakers must create frameworks that provide investment certainty, ensuring capacity is available when needed.   - Reducing methane emissions requires transatlantic alignment. Decarbonizing gas production and transport is critical, but regulations in the U.S. and EU must align to avoid unnecessary costs and complexity. A coordinated approach will ensure progress without driving up consumer prices.   As energy markets evolve, collaboration between industry, policymakers, and global partners remains key. Looking forward to continued discussions on how we can balance energy security, sustainability, and affordability.   #CERAWeek2025 #EnergyTransition #LNG #GasPower #MethaneReduction #SecurityOfSupply

181

1 commentaire

Now let's take a look at the final nominee for GAR’s Most Important Decision of the Year: EDF Energies Nouvelles S.A. (“EDF EN”) v Spain. In a landmark decision issued on 3 April 2024, the Swiss Supreme Court dismissed Spain’s challenge to an Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) award, reaffirming the jurisdiction of a Geneva-seated tribunal over an intra-EU investment dispute. The ruling stands in direct contrast to the approach of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), as the Swiss court firmly rejected the reasoning in Komstroy, emphasizing the primacy of international law over EU law in treaty interpretation. The dispute arose from a series of Spanish regulatory reforms that significantly reduced remuneration for renewable energy investments, prompting the French energy company to initiate arbitration under the ECT. The arbitral tribunal found that Spain had breached its fair and equitable treatment obligations and ordered the State to pay EUR 29.6 million in damages. Spain sought to have the award set aside by the Swiss Supreme Court, arguing that intra-EU investment arbitration was incompatible with EU law and that Article 26 of the ECT did not encompass disputes between EU investors and EU member States. In a decision closely watched by the arbitration community, the Swiss Supreme Court rejected Spain’s arguments, holding that: The ECT provides “unconditional consent” to arbitration, with no carve-out for intra-EU disputes. The Komstroy ruling was based solely on preserving the autonomy of EU law, failing to consider international law and the rules of treaty interpretation. As a non-EU State, Switzerland was not bound by EU law. EU law does not take precedence over the ECT, as the Treaty does not include a disconnection clause that would limit its application to intra-EU disputes. The decision underscores the growing divergence between EU and non-EU jurisdictions on intra-EU investment arbitration under the ECT. It aligns with the recent approach of UK courts while contrasting sharply with the Svea Court of Appeal’s decision in Triodos v. Spain, which set aside an intra-EU ECT award based on Komstroy. While the ruling strengthens Switzerland’s position as a favorable seat for investment arbitration, it also highlights the challenges of enforcing intra-EU awards within the EU. Spain has since confirmed its withdrawal from the ECT, joining other EU member States in exiting the Treaty, raising further questions about the future of investment protection within the bloc. EDF EN was represented by Philippe Bärtsch from Schellenberg Wittmer before the Swiss Federal Tribunal. Gaillard Banifatemi Shelbaya Disputes acted in the arbitration (with the late Professor Gaillard and Ximena Herrera), with Benjamin Siino and François Bordes also advising on the proceedings before Swiss courts. Spain was represented by MLL Legal. #InternationalArbitration #TheArtOfArbitration #ParisArbitrationWeek

87

1 commentaire