Micula and others v Romania

Micula and others v Romania

The Supreme Court held that the UK's obligations under the ICSID Convention to recognise and enforce arbitral awards are protected by Article 351 TFEU and are not overridden by EU law or the duty of sincere co-operation. The stay on enforcement was unlawful and unjustified; the order for security was discharged.

Parties
Respondent/cross Appellant: Mr Viorel Micula; Respondent/cross Appellant: Mr Ioan Micula; Respondent/cross Appellant: SC European Food SA; Respondent/cross Appellant: SC Starmill SRL; Respondent/cross Appellant: SC Multipack SRL; Appellant/cross Respondent: Romania; Intervener: European Commission
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
Cross-appeal allowed; appeal dismissed as unnecessary.
Legal Topics
ICSID Convention Enforcement, State Aid, EU Treaties Conflict, Article 351 TFEU, Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards
International Arbitration EU Law Public International Law ICSID Convention Enforcement State Aid EU Treaties Conflict Article 351 TFEU Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Viorel Micula

Respondent/cross Appellant

Mr Ioan Micula

Respondent/cross Appellant

SC European Food SA

Respondent/cross Appellant

SC Starmill SRL

Respondent/cross Appellant

SC Multipack SRL

Respondent/cross Appellant

Romania

Appellant/cross Respondent

European Commission

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether UK courts must stay enforcement of an ICSID award against Romania due to EU law and Commission decisions
  2. 2 Whether Article 351 TFEU protects UK's pre-accession obligations under the ICSID Convention from being overridden by EU law
  3. 3 Whether the duty of sincere co-operation under EU law requires a stay of enforcement pending EU proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the UK's obligations under the ICSID Convention to recognise and enforce arbitral awards are protected by Article 351 TFEU and are not overridden by EU law or the duty of sincere co-operation. The stay on enforcement was unlawful and unjustified; the order for security was discharged.

Court Disposition

Cross-appeal allowed; appeal dismissed as unnecessary.

Orders

  • Stay on enforcement of the award lifted.
  • Order for security discharged.