IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eps/cepswp/12570.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Court’s Opinion on the EU-Singapore FTA: Throwing off the shackles of mixity?

Author

Listed:
  • Van der Loo, Guillaume

Abstract

In its landmark Opinion 2/15 the Court of Justice of the European Union concluded that the entire EU-Singapore FTA falls under the exclusive competences of the EU, with the notable exception of portfolio investment and the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanism. Although the result is that the trade agreement with Singapore is ‘mixed’, and therefore also needs to be ratified by all the 28 member states, this Opinion may actually contribute to the credibility and effectiveness of the EU’s trade policy. In line with the EU’s broadened trade competences, brought about by the Treaty of Lisbon, the Court confirmed that the EU has the exclusive competences to realise almost all its broad trade-related objectives in ‘EU-only’ FTAs, covering trade in goods, services, intellectual property rights, public procurement and sustainable development. If investor-state dispute settlement and portfolio investment are excluded, such future EU FTAs will not be jeopardised by 28 additional – and sometimes unpredictable – ratification procedures in the member states. The Commission should therefore pursue ‘EU-only’ FTAs and cover portfolio investment and investor-state dispute settlement, such as the new Investment Court System, in separate agreements, or not at all. Member states on the other hand should to refrain from deliberately making EU FTAs mixed, as this would contradict the spirit of the Lisbon Treaty and the Court’s case law.

Suggested Citation

  • Van der Loo, Guillaume, 2017. "The Court’s Opinion on the EU-Singapore FTA: Throwing off the shackles of mixity?," CEPS Papers 12570, Centre for European Policy Studies.
  • Handle: RePEc:eps:cepswp:12570
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ceps.eu/system/files/PI2017-17Gvdl_SingaporeJudgement.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eps:cepswp:12570. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Margarita Minkova). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/cepssbe.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.