Paris Agreement Dispute Settlement

At the international level, it seems that it is only a matter of time before potential conflicts between investors and states (ISDRs) arise within the framework of the Paris Agreement. My presentation focused on the role of international arbitration, particularly investment arbitration, in the implementation of the Paris Agreement`s obligations. Can arbitration, a method of dispute resolution whose great advantage is its speed, be useful in the implementation of the Paris Agreement? Could an international arbitration procedure be put in place to ensure the necessary investments and implement the global climate change agenda? In this regard, could international arbitration adequately address the impact of human rights? -were some of the most important issues that my presentation addressed. I have proposed four main areas or gateways that are relevant to the substitutability of the Paris Agreement with regard to arbitration. First, the relevance of the Paris Agreements for the evaluation of investment arbitration procedures in the energy sector – through the study „Right to Regulation“ Trends in the most recent case law. Secondly, the convergence of forums such as the Arbitration Tribunals and the European Court of Justice in achieving the objectives of the Paris Agreement. Third, the role of third-party intervention in investment arbitration procedures (intergovernmental organizations and NGOs) that make arbitration tribunals aware of public law arguments (both on environmental law and human rights). Fourth, the possibility of moving towards the capacity of arbiter of human rights not only against states, but also companies (an initiative for an international arbitration tribunal for the economy and human rights already exists). There is no enforcement mechanism in the Paris Agreement. However, trends show that several actors have innovated in the use of different legal mechanisms to solve problems related to the environment and climate change. In this regard, the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce stated that „investors have used international arbitration to resolve disputes related, among other things, to the government`s incentives and failures in the application of environmental legislation.“ In the meantime, we have seen an increase in climate change litigation, which has been brought before national courts. Calls for a resolution of disputes arising from the negative effects of climate change on the environment and which affect humans are growing. In this context, I discussed the need for dispute resolution mechanisms (including arbitration procedures) for cases related to climate change between private parties, embodied by a case currently being tried in a regional court in Germany: for the first time, a person affected by the dangers of climate change is suing a company in Europe for redress.

A Peruvian farmer sues the energy group RWE in the Essen Regional Court. The man claims that RWE – supposedly one of Europe`s largest historical emitters according to a report published in the 2013 journal Climatic Change – is „one of the largest historical emitters in Europe“ in the Huaraz Glacial Melt in Peru`s Cordillera Blanca, which concerns his home.