Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) started a global debate on the need to reform international investment regulation, which currently focuses on finding appropriate multilateral options in the framework of the UN Commission on International Trade Law. The European Union (EU) has been particularly active in this debate, proposing a new Multilateral Investment Court (MIC) that would address problems with the current regime.

This study seeks to examine the extent to which EU’s institutional proposal to create a MIC achieves EU’s normative goals and effects change in international investment law. This research particularly emphasises the legal and political dimension of the EU’s international investment agenda and the ways in which this agenda is materialised in practice. Firstly, by comparing the international investment regime with the EU legal order, this thesis explores how the EU’s legal and constitutional framework shaped and influenced the EU investment policy. Secondly, by analysing the recent landmark decisions of the Court of Justice of the EU in the field of investment, the study explores the role of the Court in overcoming internal EU political disagreements and achieving EU
integration objectives. Finally, the research examines how the EU seeks to export its values by proposing a MIC and setting new standards in international investment law.