Search results

Investigates the differences in protocols between arbitral tribunals and courts, with particular emphasis on US, Greek and English law. Gives examples of each country and its way of using the law in specific circumstances, and shows the variations therein. Sums up that arbitration is much the better way to gok as it avoids delays and expenses, plus the vexation/frustration of normal litigation. Concludes that the US and Greek constitutions and common law tradition in England appear to allow involved parties to choose their own judge, who can thus be an arbitrator. Discusses e‐commerce and speculates on this for the future.

This article aims to deal with international investment disputes, with a focus on the nature of the law applicable to the merits of such disputes.

The procedure for determining the law applicable in investment disputes, the phases of determination and the impact thereof on the applicable law were analyzed. The diagonality of the disputes and its impact on the law applicable to the merits from the perspective of the interaction between national and international law were also analyzed. Further, the authors focused on the nature of the host state's breach of obligations towards the investor anchored in the investment treaty, and the effect thereof on the law applicable to the merits. In this respect, the notion of the investment itself was analyzed according to the relevant BITs and MITs. Finally, the authors analyzed the applicability of the Ordre Public concept to investment disputes.

The study provided practical demonstrations and examples of choice of law and application issues as resolved by the tribunals established under the ICSID.

The article deals mainly with the ICSID proceedings. Another should be also analyzed.

The paper provides a new insight into issues of the law applicable to investment disputes by analyzing this problematic in relation to all stages of investment arbitration proceedings. Particularly it took an innovative approach in shedding light on and analyzing the applicability of the Ordre Public concept in relation to investment protection, especially in relation to Article 52 of the ICSID Convention, and the recognition and enforcement proceedings of arbitral awards issued in the course of investment arbitration.

E-commerce is gaining popularity across the globe and Mauritian businesses are also increasingly making use of online platforms to engage in cross-border electronic transactions. However, there are several implications arising from online trading which need to be addressed, among which one is the validity of e-contracts. This research will therefore emphasise on two main components of e-contracts: choice of law and the applicable jurisdiction. While Mauritian laws were amended to give effect to digital signatures and e-agreements, there is no extensive or substantive domestic legal provision on choice of law and jurisdiction. Hence, the purpose of this study is to advocate for a greater clarity on the legal framework governing the applicable law and jurisdiction governing a conflict situation in e-contracts, with the view of increasing trust in international e-commerce and to bring in consistency with international commercial relations. This study will be carried out in the Mauritian context by adopting the black letter approach which will analyse the relevant rules and regulations concerning e-contract formation and validity. Additionally, a comparative analysis will be conducted on the legal framework relating to the applicable law and jurisdiction in e-contracts for selected countries: the European Union and the United States. These countries have been chosen for the comparison due to their high involvement in e-commerce and their advanced as well as comprehensive rules on e-commerce.

To explain the Hague Securities Convention in the context of secured financing transactions in the US and to discuss the implications of the Convention on new and existing transactions, as well as on market practice going forward.

This article provides a broad overview of the Hague Securities Convention and the impact of the Convention’s choice of law rules on secured financing transactions in the US involving intermediated securities, including how this deviates from previously applicable laws (such as the Uniform Commercial Code), and provides practical considerations with respect to secured financing transactions.

While in most circumstances the Convention provides for the same choice of law as previously applicable laws, there are certain scenarios where the Convention will produce a different result. Market practice with respect to perfecting security interests will likely change to take account of the Convention and to provide the parties with certainty regarding the law applicable to secured transactions.

The Convention calls for increased diligence with respect to the law governing the account agreement between the debtor and the securities intermediary and whether the securities intermediary has a qualifying office in that jurisdiction.

Practical guidance from experienced finance lawyers.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the compliance of foreign investment projects with local environmental standards in Ethiopia. It examines the cause and impact of the environmental problems created by such projects as well as the necessary policy response, especially by examining the role of the applicable bilateral investment treaties (BITs) in enforcing local standards.

The research approach is fundamentally an empirical study with some doctrinal analysis. The empirical data (qualitative) was collected through interviews, focus group discussions and observation tools.

The investment projects selected for the case studies were not complying with the local environmental standards, which resulted in several environmental problems. The major cause for the overall environmental problems was not a legal gap in the local standards, but the failure of enforcing such standards by the government bodies and foreign investors. The applicable BITs also played no role in environmental protection as they do not impose environmental obligations along with enforcement mechanisms. Non-compliance with local standards can be mitigated if the applicable BITs impose environmental obligations along with workable enforcement mechanisms – as a treaty obligation has more binding force. The author argues that, in general, foreign investments are not environmental-friendly unless otherwise strictly regulated by combining local environmental standards and a BIT that imposes environmental obligations (along with enforcement mechanisms) on the foreign investors, host state and home state.

The existing literature does not deal with the environmental problems, the enforcement constraints and the role of the applicable BITs together in a single publication. They separately address these issues, which do not give a comprehensive understanding of the cause-and-effect relationship. This paper fills this gap by presenting comprehensive findings that combine the environmental problems and the associated enforcement constraints as well as the role of the applicable BITs in this regard. It also contributes to the ongoing debate concerning whether foreign direct investment is good or bad for the environment by producing empirical evidence from Ethiopia, the African continent.

Presents an updated version of a paper given by the author at an international conference in Athens 2000. Briefly outlines the development of the internet and e‐commerce and the effect of globalization. Considers the potential for the EU to standardize rules and advance its economic integration agenda. Looks at present EU laws in this area. Covers the unicitral model law on electronic commerce, its merits and its problems. Discusses personal jurisdiction under traditional rules and cyberspace transactions. Concludes that existing legislation must be re‐evaluated in the light of technological advances, the need for a more mobile kind of legal person and the worldwide nature of transactions across territorial boundaries, paperless contracts and digital signatures and the use of self‐regulation are also covered.

The applicable jurisdiction for insolvency proceedings, as provided by the Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 on insolvency proceedings, is the court of the Member State where the debtor's center of main interest (COMI) is located (Article 3(1)). The Regulation, however, does not provide a comprehensive definition of the COMI. This paper seeks to explore the meaning and developments behind the meaning of COMI as influenced by judicial reasoning and conflicts across Member States.

The study centres around the emerging jurisprudence and analyses case law across Member States in order to draw conclusions on the meaning of COMI and the emerging concepts. Extensive consideration of statutory interpretation, case reports and judicial comment is present in order to inform and develop conclusions.

In the absence of a definition it appears that the only relevant European guidance emerges from recital 13 and Article 3 (1). With little guidance in the Regulation, it has therefore been left to national courts to decide how the notion of COMI should be interpreted. Determining the COMI has emerged as one of the most controversial aspect and the principle point of legal conflict, with some highly debated cases within member states’ courts. On the basis of the case law, it is suggested that the interpretation of COMI is more flexible in UK and Italian courts. The approach adopted in continental Europe is referred to as the “centre of operations approach”, i.e. the debtor's COMI has to be determined by the place where he is “ascertainable by third parties”. The Anglo Saxon approach, on the other hand, is known as the “mind of management approach”, i.e. the debtor's COMI must be situated where decisions are actually made. The latter seems to enjoy a more practical and accessible approach.

Not only will the findings assist those seeking to understand the process and COMI requirements across member states but it will also assist those researchers seeking to understanding the comparative and conflict of law barriers to pan‐European insolvency proceedings.

This paper aims to analyse the legal framework of reincorporations and subsequent change of applicable law in Greece and Cyprus. A comparison between Greek Law and Cyprus Law is drawn. This paper highlights possible required reforms. Cyprus has a quite detailed legal framework of voluntary inbound and outbound reincorporations. While Greece has certain provisions on outbound reincorporations, it does not have any provisions on inbound reincorporations. The compatibility of these national provisions with internal market rules, as interpreted by the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU), is discussed.

This paper follows a comparative approach. After a careful analysis of each national legal framework, a comparison between Greek law and Cyprus law follows. This paper also follows an EU law approach.

These two jurisdictions present some differences. Cyprus adopting the incorporation theory has a detailed, sophisticated and flexible legal framework of reincorporations. Although Greece adopting the real seat theory has some special provisions for outbound reincorporations, there are no specific provisions for inbound reincorporations. Inbound reincorporations are possible under Greek law, but the absence of detailed provisions is against legal certainty. Cyprus law on reincorporations could be used as an example for Greek legislature. However, possible EU harmonisation of seat transfers is expected to have an immense impact on national provisions for reincorporations.

Reincorporations constitute a significant corporate restructuring technique with important practical implications on the economy. Apart from academics, this paper attracts the interest of lawyers, managers, accountants, officers of supervisory and regulatory bodies and policymakers engaged with reincorporations.

This is one of the few academic papers comparing Greek and Cyprus company law and private international law. It is the first paper that compares the Greek and Cyprus legal framework of reincorporations.

The paper aims to examine whether the panel and parties of China – Intellectual Property Rights could have applied the general principle of necessity developed under Article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and Article XIV of the General Agreement on Trade in Services. This paper specifically seeks to examine applicability of the general principle of necessity in the World Trade Organization (WTO) tribunal's analysis of the provisions of the Berne Convention, which is incorporated by Article 9 of the Trade‐related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement.

The paper performs a series of documentary/archival research and case studies of the jurisprudence and interpretative methods of the WTO adjudicative bodies.

The general principle of necessity in WTO jurisprudence is applicable when a measure taken by a WTO member is inconsistent with WTO provisions, the measure is highly relevant to the sovereignty of the WTO member, the WTO member seeks to justify the measure by applying one of the exceptions articulated in the WTO Agreements, and the relevant language of necessity exists in the exception provisions. If these requirements are met, the general principle of necessity would be applicable to other provision of WTO Agreements, including Article 17 of the Berne Convention incorporated by Article 9 of the TRIPS Agreement, provided that the parties of the dispute raise the defense in their arguments.

By examining the application of the general principle of necessity and its relevance to sovereignty in one of the most recent disputes in the WTO, this paper analyzes a decision that could have considerable impacts on the jurisprudence of future disputes regarding enforcement of intellectual property rights in the WTO regime.

This chapter seeks to reveal what are the implications of the corporate social responsibility (CSR) debate on international investment law by focusing on the specific example of public health. The right to health is one of the human rights secured in international law and in the national legislation of a majority of States. This chapter will provide examples of investment cases concerning tobacco control measures, imposed by the Host States for the purpose of improving public health, though challenged by the tobacco companies under International Investment Agreements (IIAs) in investment tribunals. These specific examples cast rather general questions regarding the legal framework of international investment framework and its role in providing sufficient policy space for Host States to implement the public policies and to ensure that foreign companies adhere to the CSR standards.

In order to investigate what are the implications of the CSR debate on international investment law on the example of tobacco industry, the author performs a literature review and analyze two tobacco disputes and its possible implication on the public health debate and protection of foreign investors.

This case study illustrates the complex paradigm that interlink economic and human rights obligations of States on one side of the spectrum and property rights and social responsibilities of tobacco companies on the other side.

This chapter addresses a very topical and pertinent issue in public international law, namely: the role of public interest norms in the regime of foreign direct investment.