OUP: European Journal of International Law最新文献

Trade Mark Protection, Public Health and International Investment Law: Strains and Paradoxes 商标保护、公共卫生与国际投资法:矛盾与矛盾

OUP: European Journal of International Law Pub Date : 2009-08-01 DOI: 10.1093/ejil/chp058

V. Vadi

{"title":"Trade Mark Protection, Public Health and International Investment Law: Strains and Paradoxes","authors":"V. Vadi","doi":"10.1093/ejil/chp058","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chp058","url":null,"abstract":"This article aims at exploring the antinomies and paradoxes of trade mark protection in international investment law. The negative impact of trade mark protection on public health seems counterintuitive or even paradoxical. Strong trade mark protection is usually associated with positive effects on consumer protection and, more generally, there is a sort of mystical thinking about trade marks. Brand names are deemed the keystone of a competitive economy, where individuals are encouraged to do the best they can and make their products recognizable to the public, who will determine their eventual success. However, it is a common criticism that in recent years law makers and judges have expanded the rights of trade mark owners too far, at the expense of the common weal. In some cases, trade marks have been used in an aggressive fashion by corporations in order to chill public health regulation. At the international level, this expansion ultimately determines the emergence of antinomies between intellectual property law and other branches of public international law. This article critically assesses international trade mark protection in order to verify whether such a paradox and the consequent systemic antinomies may be resolved. It also puts forward some legal mechanisms which may help policy makers and adjudicators to reconcile trade mark protection and public health in international investment law.","PeriodicalId":377099,"journal":{"name":"OUP: European Journal of International Law","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"120925198","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 16

Taking Uncertainty Seriously: Adaptive Governance and International Trade: A Reply to Rosie Cooney and Andrew Lang 严肃对待不确定性:适应性治理与国际贸易:对罗西·库尼、安德鲁·朗的回答

OUP: European Journal of International Law Pub Date : 2009-02-01 DOI: 10.1093/ejil/chn076

Mónica García-Salmones

{"title":"Taking Uncertainty Seriously: Adaptive Governance and International Trade: A Reply to Rosie Cooney and Andrew Lang","authors":"Mónica García-Salmones","doi":"10.1093/ejil/chn076","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chn076","url":null,"abstract":"The use of experts' power in global networks is often concealed by describing it in the register of scientific truths. This text seeks to illustrate the phenomenon by reference to the recent article by Cooney and Lang, ‘Taking Uncertainty Seriously: Adaptive Governance and International Trade’, which appeared in this journal. The account those authors give of WTO law goes beyond a purely legitimacy-based structure focused on effectiveness. Instead, the question is framed in terms of cognitive achievements by regulators in the member states. The present article uses Cooney and Lang's project and the same example of the WTO in order to evaluate global governance. In so doing it analyses the functionalist style of public law, together with neofunctionalism and the historical phenomena by which increasing areas in the public sphere are attributed to regulators, both national and international. With this article, the author hopes to contribute to the debate about the tensions caused by the legal activity of international organizations in a world of equal sovereigns with unequal access to power. In conclusion it is suggested that, so far as contemporary global governance is concerned, the distribution of jurisdiction through regulation is the sphere in which the usual political struggles between international actors take place.","PeriodicalId":377099,"journal":{"name":"OUP: European Journal of International Law","volume":"21 22","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131717718","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 70

Determining the Necessity of Domestic Regulations in Services: The Best is Yet to Come 确定服务业国内法规的必要性:最好的尚未到来

OUP: European Journal of International Law Pub Date : 2008-04-01 DOI: 10.1093/ejil/chn010

Panos Delimatsis

引用次数: 19

Status of Forces and Status of Mission Agreements Under the ESDP: The EU's Evolving Practice ESDP下的部队地位和特派团地位协定:欧盟不断发展的实践

OUP: European Journal of International Law Pub Date : 2008-02-01 DOI: 10.1093/EJIL/CHN003

A. Sari

{"title":"Status of Forces and Status of Mission Agreements Under the ESDP: The EU's Evolving Practice","authors":"A. Sari","doi":"10.1093/EJIL/CHN003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/EJIL/CHN003","url":null,"abstract":"The conduct of EU military and civilian crisis management operations in third states within the context of the European Security and Defence Policy has presented the EU with new administrative and operational challenges in recent years, including the need to define the international legal position of such operations and their personnel during their presence abroad. In some cases, the EU has entered into agreements with host states to determine the legal status of EU crisis management operations, while in other cases the application of already existing arrangements has been extended to them. The status agreements negotiated directly by the EU confer more extensive privileges and immunities on EU operations and their personnel than current international practice in this area would warrant. Despite opposition to this policy within the EU, it has remained in place under the two model status agreements adopted by the Council of the European Union in 2005 to serve as a basis for negotiations with prospective host states in all future EU operations. Even though no norm of international law compels the EU to request only such privileges and immunities as are absolutely necessary for the purposes of an operation, its practice of negotiating extensive privileges and immunities does not sit well with the growing emphasis on the accountability of peace support operations. This article offers an overview of the evolution of the EU's practice of concluding status agreements in the context of the European Security and Defence Policy and examines the key provisions of the two model status agreements.","PeriodicalId":377099,"journal":{"name":"OUP: European Journal of International Law","volume":"164 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2008-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123266574","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 47

The Application of the Most-Favoured-Nation Clause to the Dispute Settlement Provisions of Bilateral Investment Treaties: Domesticating the Trojan Horse 最惠国待遇条款在双边投资协定争端解决条款中的适用:驯养特洛伊木马

OUP: European Journal of International Law Pub Date : 2007-09-01 DOI: 10.1093/EJIL/CHM031

Y. Radi

{"title":"The Application of the Most-Favoured-Nation Clause to the Dispute Settlement Provisions of Bilateral Investment Treaties: Domesticating the Trojan Horse","authors":"Y. Radi","doi":"10.1093/EJIL/CHM031","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/EJIL/CHM031","url":null,"abstract":"Contracting states bring a Trojan Horse into the city when providing for most-favoured-nation clauses (MFN clause) in bilateral investment treaties (BIT). This affects the general equilibrium of the treaties, as recent case law from investment arbitration tribunals illustrates. In these cases the controversial issue is the applicability of the MFN clause to the dispute settlement provisions of the BITs. Arbitration practice and mainstream literature so far have focussed on the specific nature of the dispute settlement mechanism, asking whether the MFN clause should cover it or not. This article analyses the arguments put forward so far on this issue, and argues that by reason of the effet utile the MFN clause always covers the dispute settlement mechanism, unless the opposite intention of the Contracting states can be demonstrated. Furthermore, this article considers that the prevailing focus on the entire mechanism is misleading. The main issue is in fact the scope of application of the MFN clause to the individual provisions on dispute settlement. Underlying this issue there is the tension between the MFN clause and the other provisions of BITs, whatever their procedural or substantive nature. This tension puts into question the rationality of providing for MFN clauses in bilateral investment treaties. But once such a clause is already adopted, this article suggests that the way to domesticate this Trojan Horse is to substitute conditional MFN clauses for the unconditional MFN clauses presently provided for in BITs.","PeriodicalId":377099,"journal":{"name":"OUP: European Journal of International Law","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130154402","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 46

Proportionality and Remedies in WTO Disputes WTO争端的比例性与救济

OUP: European Journal of International Law Pub Date : 2006-11-01 DOI: 10.1093/ejil/chl034

A. Mitchell

引用次数: 16