000			01519nab a2200241 c 4500
999			_c147780 _d147780
003			ES-MaIEF
005			20230627112125.0
007			ta
008			230627t2023 ne ||||| |||| 00| 0|eng d
040			_aES-MaIEF _bspa _cES-MaIEF
100			_921049 _aPérez Bernabeu, Begoña
245		0	_aState aid through arbitration awards _bEU law as a ground for non-enforcement _c Begoña Pérez-Bernabeu
500			_aResumen.
520			_aThe article examines the tensions between international investment law and EU law as evidenced by the Achmea and the Micula cases decided by the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ). The author recalls that, although the European Commission used the State aid rules to attack arbitration awards arising from intra EU bilateral investment treaties (BITs), the ECJ has not yet validated the application of State aid rules to the enforcement of intra-EU awards. The author further claims that the upcoming General Court’s judgment on the Micula case will not be sufficient to clarify the compatibility of intra-EU awards in non-EU jurisdictions with EU law because State aid rules are not applicable beyond the EU borders.
650		4	_aINVERSIONES _947531
650		4	_947874 _aOPERACIONES INTRACOMUNITARIAS
650		4	_932236 _aAYUDA ESTATAL
650		4	_928417 _aARBITRAJE
650		4	_aJURISPRUDENCIA _947570
650		4	_aUNION EUROPEA _948644
773	0		_9169600 _oOP 2141/2023/3 _tIntertax _w(IEF)55619 _x 0165-2826 _g v. 51, n. 3, March 2023, p. 219-231
942			_cART