On 21 November, the European Court of Justice (CJEU) issued a far-reaching ruling on the legal treatment of production relocations under the Union Customs Code (Harley-Davidson Europe – C-297/23 P). The decision has been rendered against the backdrop of globally growing protectionist tendencies in international trade policy.

In our series of briefings, we highlight some of the key issues of International Investment Law (IIL). In this fourth edition, we focus on the complex relationship between IIL and foreign direct investment (FDI) screening laws.

In this third briefing on International Investment Law (IIL), we examine how IIL and in-vestor-state arbitration may be used in response to the so-called countersanctions adopted by the Russian government in retaliation to sanctions imposed by the EU and its Western partners.

In this second edition of BLOMSTEIN’s International Investment Law (IIL) briefing series, we look at how the EU’s sanctions against Russia are affecting existing investments in Russia and investment arbitrations against the Russian state. Meanwhile, our next briefing will look at the impact of Russia’s countersanctions on investors and their prospects for redress under IIL.

Foreign direct investments (FDI) have faced greater scrutiny in recent years, as states increasingly subject investment transactions to screening procedures due to rising geopolitical tensions and national security concerns. The Russian invasion of Ukraine and the worsening climate crisis have prompted stronger and more frequent state actions. Regulatory measures and new security policies will likely impact existing and planned investments significantly. For instance, EU financial sanctions can directly affect the ability to control investments by investors subject to asset freezes and other restrictions. Russian “counter sanctions”, on the other hand, have included threats of expropriation to Western companies, with one machine tool manufacturer already reporting that the Russian government nationalized one of its plants.

BLOMSTEIN hat den Hersteller für textile Hochleistungsmaterialien Outlast Technologies GmbH bei seinem Verkauf an den chinesischen Textilhersteller Shanghai Sunwin Industry Group Co., Ltd. zu investitionskontrollrechtlichen Aspekten beraten. Die Transaktion wurde zwischenzeitlich von den zuständigen Behörden, insbesondere dem Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Klimaschutz, genehmigt.

The Foreign Subsidies Regulation’s (FSR) concentration and public procurement tool came into force one year ago in October 2023. Its first year of application has shown that the European Commission is determined to make use of its new tools to tackle third-country subsidies distorting competition in the EU internal market. In this briefing, we provide an overview of the most important FSR rules and the lessons learned from their first application.

This briefing is the seventh and last in a series on the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), where BLOMSTEIN addresses the key aspects that (in)directly affect businesses both within and outside the EU, explores its interplay with the existing legislation in Germany (LkSG) and examines interactions with other recently adopted EU legislation (e.g., EUDR and CSRD) which partially set overlapping obligations.

In today’s briefing, we examine the key considerations with respect to the EU’s corporate sustainability package for companies operating outside the EU but that have business ties in the EU. Specifically, we will address the direct and indirect impacts for non-EU companies of the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and other related regulations mentioned along the series, including the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), as well as the upcoming Forced Labour Regulation and Green Claims Directive .

In the world of high-stakes mergers and acquisitions, even the best-laid plans can falter. Just ask Illumina and GRAIL, who recently found themselves at the center of an unprecedented European Commission fine—EUR 432 million, no less—for allegedly “jumping the gun.” While the Commission decision was later annulled by the European Court of Justice (CJEU) on jurisdictional grounds, the case underscores a critical lesson for businesses: the risks of prematurely implementing a transaction before securing the necessary clearances are all too real. As companies venture into the German market, navigating both merger control and foreign direct investment (FDI) rules becomes even more complex. Knowing where to draw the line between preparation and premature action is essential. The stakes are high, and compliance with these frameworks is crucial to avoid costly penalties and safeguard the successful completion of M&A transactions.

Over the summer, not only the EU has tightened its sanctions against Russia and Belarus (see our previous briefings here and here). The US has also imposed additional restrictions with a particular focus on certain hardware, software, and services (see, e.g., here and here). However, many of these new US restrictions have been part of the EU sanctions in one form or another for some time now. Still, it is often overlooked that these restrictions have a significant impact on IT and software products and can affect business relationships with customers outside of Russia and Belarus.