Browse results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 15,473 items for :

  • Private International Law / Conflict of Laws x
  • Search level: All x
Clear All
This volume offers new insight into key developments in the history of protection for patent rights during the period 1791-1883. The author presents a detailed examination of the underlying theoretical bases advanced for the protection of patents in various key European countries, and including new material focusing on the political rhetoric of protagonists and opponents of the patent system during the course of the patent abolitionist debates of the 1860s and 1870s. Finally, the book examines in detail the factors which prompted the movement towards international protection of patents, culminating in the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property of 1883.

Abstract

In Investor State Arbitration in a Changing World Order, the authors examine the sustained worldwide challenges to investor state arbitration arising from across the political spectrum. These challenges have led to extensive and thoughtful proposals for reform from the international arbitration community, domestic lawmakers, and international bureaucrats. These reforms play an important role in the continuous evolution of investor state arbitration, and will enhance the quality of justice rendered. However, the authors argue, these reforms are insufficient to resolve the domestic political challenges that investor state arbitration faces. Only political solutions that justify for broad populations the international flow of capital and the independent resolution of disputes arising therefrom can preserve the institution of investor state arbitration. Absent the more equitable distribution of the benefits associated with the international flow of capital, political support for investor state arbitration will remain tenuous, notwithstanding the significant de-escalatory benefits investor state arbitration offers.

In: Investor State Arbitration in a Changing World Order
Author: Ardeshir Atai
Since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Iran has implemented Sharia-compliant banking and finance which makes it one of the few countries that has adopted Islamic banking. The post-war liberalization and privatization of the economy and subsequent deregulation had paved the ground for emergence of private banks and financial institutions which had been subject to strict government control and ownership of banks. Further reform of the banking sector included authorization for the establishment and operations of foreign-owned banks in Iran and ratification of international treaties for the reciprocal protection and promotion of capital investments. The most recent government reform plan concerning adoption of a comprehensive banking law aims to create a single regulator for the prudential regulation and supervision of banks and financial institutions. The implementation of the aforesaid banking reform will be instrumental for achieving a sound and safe banking system and restoring investor confidence in the Iranian banking and money markets.
Author: Ardeshir Atai

Abstract

The law reform process entails government policies and plans for the liberalization, privatization and deregulations of the economy including the banking and money markets. The International financial institutions (IFIs), International Development Agencies (IDAs) and the International Financial Architecture have pioneered law reform initiatives based on the rule of law practice and good governance. The dominant theory advocated by Perry-kessaris postulates that a sound legal system is attractive for foreign direct investment (FDI). The bilateral investment treaties (BITs) contain international law standards which can be used as a model for reforming laws and institutions in the host state including prudential regulation of banking and finance. Iran – a resource-rich country has signed many BITs with capital-exporting countries indicating its willingness to enforce the rule of law on the international level.

In: Reform of Banking Laws and Regulations in Iran
Enabling the victims of international crimes to obtain reparation is crucial to fighting impunity. In Universal Civil Jurisdiction – Which Way Forward? experts of public and private international law discuss one of the key challenges that victims face, namely access to justice. Civil courts in the country where the crime was committed may be biased, or otherwise unwilling or unable to hear the case. Are the courts of other countries permitted, or required, to rule on the victim’s claim? Trends at the international and the domestic level after the Naït-Liman judgment of the European Court of Human Rights offer a nuanced answer, suggesting that civil jurisdiction is not only concerned with sovereignty, but is also a tool for the governance of global problems.
Author: Andrea Saccucci

Abstract

The chapter offers a detailed summary of the judgment rendered by the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Naït-Liman v Switzerland, coupled with a critical evaluation of the conceptual and normative premises underpinning the judicial reasoning. The appraisal is performed against the backdrop of the ECtHR’s jurisprudence as well as with reference to the broader framework of international human rights law and practice, both judicial and non-judicial in nature.

In: Universal Civil Jurisdiction
Author: Pietro Franzina

Abstract

The tensions surrounding the regulation of adjudicatory jurisdiction, including as regards the admissibility of, and the conditions for, the exercise of universal civil jurisdiction, are premised on the understanding that jurisdiction, as a legal notion, is concerned essentially with power. The practice of States, however, is evolving. Jurisdiction can no longer be described as being solely about power, nor chiefly about States. A different conception of jurisdiction is emerging which involves responsibility alongside power, and is concerned with the efficiency, not just the legitimacy, of States’ action. The contention is made that a renewed understanding of jurisdiction, one acknowledging the role that cooperation and dialogue between courts play in the management of cross-border disputes, would help shape workable responses to the challenges posed by the recourse to civil litigation in connection with international wrongs.

In: Universal Civil Jurisdiction

Abstract

At the very core of the ‘fragmentation’ discourse, human rights law is often depicted as the self-contained regime par excellence, benefitting from somewhat specific rules and principles, which often derogate from general international law. However controversial and debatable, this stance may be at least partially founded with reference to the issue of treaty interpretation. The rule provided under Article 31 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties is often stretched and applied in a more flexible way by human rights instances charged with the interpretation and application of human rights treaties, such as the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights. In the recent Naït-Liman case, nevertheless, the latter seems to have embraced a different and more restrictive attitude towards interpretation, downplaying the concerns surrounding the effet utile of the provision under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

In: Universal Civil Jurisdiction
In: Universal Civil Jurisdiction