International Economic Law eJournal最新文献

{"title":"Community Interests in World Trade Law","authors":"C. Tietje, Andrej Lang","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2884345","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2884345","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter examines the question on whether World Trade Organization (WTO) law protects community interests, revisiting the interrelated scholarly debates about whether the WTO’s legal system resembles a ‘constitution’ or a ‘contract’ and whether WTO obligations are ‘bilateral’ or ‘collective’. The first part of the chapter addresses challenges that are brought forward against the WTO system pursuing community interests; in particular that it only sets forth bilateral obligations, disregards nontrade values, and is unfair to developing countries. The second part examines structural elements of WTO law that are indicative of community interests, namely the non-discrimination principles, the limits on derogability, and the design of enforcement mechanisms. The chapter concludes that WTO law protects the community interest of promoting an essentially rules-based and fair world market. It argues that the core concern of WTO law is to protect trade-conducive structures that enable and further global economic activity for the purpose of generating overall welfare.","PeriodicalId":378416,"journal":{"name":"International Economic Law eJournal","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132884615","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}

{"title":"Foreword: The Continuing Relevance of the Trans-Pacific Partnership","authors":"A. Mitchell, Tania Voon","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3155975","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3155975","url":null,"abstract":"We are delighted to introduce this special issue of the Melbourne Journal of International Law ('MJIL') on the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement ('TPP'). The special issue developed from fruitful collaboration between MJIL and Melbourne Law School's Global Economic Law Network ('GELN'), and in particular the symposium hosted by GELN at Melbourne Law School on 19-20 May 2016: The Age of Mega-Regionals: TPP & Regulatory Autonomy in International Economic Law, which was skilfully managed by Mr Christopher Pidgely. The symposium brought together more than 70 participants from around the globe including presenters from academia, non-governmental organisations, industry, the legal profession, and governmental departments in Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. The symposium benefited from a range of funding sources including the Melbourne Law School Major Collaborative Project Fund and the Australian Research Council (Discovery Project DP 130100838 and Linkage Project LP120200028, which involves collaboration with the McCabe Centre for Law and Cancer). Led by Editors Ms Anna Saunders, Ms Kara Connolly and Mr Justin Browne, MJIL issued a call for papers for the TPP special issue in conjunction with the GELN symposium but open to all. The majority of the papers in this special issue were presented at the symposium; all were selected by MJIL through a competitive process and expertly edited by MJIL's Editors and Members. Since we conceived the symposium, and since the core of the articles in this special issue were written, the world has developed in unexpected directions. In particular, the TPP appears to be but one of many casualties of the United States election held on 8 November 2016. Since then, on 21 November 2016, New Zealand became the first country to enact TPP-implementing legislation, which is specified to come into force on the date that the TPP enters into force for New Zealand. (1) Of course, the entry into force of the TPP requires ratification by either all 12 signatories (2) or by 'at least six of the original signatories, which together account for at least 85 per cent of the combined gross domestic product of the original signatories in 2013'. (3) In effect, then, both the United States and Japan must ratify the TPP for it to come into force in the form signed on 4 February 2016. And while Japan continues to pursue ratification, (4) United States President-elect Donald Trump has made clear--both before and since his election--his aversion to globalisation and trade liberalisation in general, and the TPP in particular. (His plans for bilateral as opposed to regional or multilateral trade deals are less clear, as regards both theory and practice). Should Mr Trump proceed with his threatened withdrawal from the TPP upon his inauguration, (5) the TPP in its current form is undeniably dead. However, two alternative futures exist for the TPP. First, at the time of writing, while plans to submit the TPP in the lame-duck session of Congr","PeriodicalId":378416,"journal":{"name":"International Economic Law eJournal","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127915892","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}

{"title":"The TPP and the Digital Economy: The Agreement's Potential As a Benchmark for Future Rule-Making","authors":"Simon Lacey","doi":"10.1007/978-981-10-6731-0_23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6731-0_23","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":378416,"journal":{"name":"International Economic Law eJournal","volume":"110 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122604873","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}

{"title":"Investor-State Dispute Settlement in CETA: Is It the Gold Standard?","authors":"J. Vanduzer","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2860319","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2860319","url":null,"abstract":"October 24, 2016 – CETA’s investment dispute provisions have become a lightning rod for critics of the trade pact within Europe, but in its current form, the CETA text represents a significant improvement from past trade and investment deals according to a new report from the C.D. Howe Institute. In “Investor-state Dispute Settlement in CETA: Is it the Gold Standard?,” Tony VanDuzer concludes that CETA provisions address many of the critical objections emanating from within European Union (EU) states.","PeriodicalId":378416,"journal":{"name":"International Economic Law eJournal","volume":"65 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126573747","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}

{"title":"Case Note: Philip Morris Asia v Australia","authors":"J. Hepburn, L. Nottage","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2842065","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2842065","url":null,"abstract":"This case has been a flashpoint for recent debates over investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). For Australia, subjected to its first ISDS claim, the case triggered extensive public discussion over whether to continue including ISDS clauses in future bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and investment chapters of free trade agreements (FTAs). More broadly, the case has been seen as epitomising all that is wrong with treaty-based ISDS: an unlikeable, pseudo-American multinational invoking a little-known treaty and an opaque arbitral procedure to claim billion-dollar damages arising from legislation enacted to protect public health. This distasteful image is likely to remain, especially in the public consciousness, despite the claim eventually being dismissed for treaty-shopping, and even though the award deserves to be analysed in broader context. Notably, the case is a rare successful invocation of abuse of right under general international law and even lowers the threshold for such an argument. The case may also encourage states to enhance their screening processes specifically to assess and manage litigation risks flowing from admitting a particular foreign investment.","PeriodicalId":378416,"journal":{"name":"International Economic Law eJournal","volume":"67 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131993909","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}

{"title":"Ordering the Cosmos: Private Law and Celestial Property Rights","authors":"A. Salter","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2840856","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2840856","url":null,"abstract":"The 2015 SPACE Act aims to promote wealth creation by guaranteeing protection of US citizens’ property rights to celestial resources. But there are serious concerns that government protection of space property claims are incompatible with international law. I propose a purely private legal system for space commerce as an alternative to government-defined and enforced property rights. Economic theory shows how property rights and rules for adjudicating disputes can be self-enforcing. Economic history shows that such a system has worked well for centuries in international trade. A private legal commercial order for space is thus both feasible and desirable.","PeriodicalId":378416,"journal":{"name":"International Economic Law eJournal","volume":"59 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129696860","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}

{"title":"Towards Inclusive Trade: How to Unlock the Trade Potential of Emerging Agricultural Enterprises in Sub-Saharan Africa","authors":"Scott D. Andersen, Colette van der Ven","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2844062","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2844062","url":null,"abstract":"Sub-Saharan Africa's greatest current comparative advantage lies in its agricultural sector. Most of this agricultural production takes place through emerging agricultural enterprises (EAEs) – i.e., fast growing small and medium-sized enterprises. While some EAEs engage in intra-Africa trade, few have managed to sell their various agricultural products in high-value markets, like the European Union or the United States. To help EAEs grow within their own markets and compete in overseas markets, Sidley Austin LLP established in 2012, the Sidley Emerging Enterprises Pro Bono Program. Participants have gained deep understanding of practical trade barriers impeding EAEs' trade. But factors only tangentially related to trade law also constitute key impediments to African exports to high-value markets: for instance, governments' lack of a functioning Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) or Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) regulatory framework, EAEs' inability to comply with higher quality standards in high-value markets, and problems related to negotiation and enforcement of contracts. This paper discusses some of the main market access barriers encountered by Sidley's clients, and practical ways to address these barriers, including through the principles, tools and resources made available by the WTO. It provides a brief overview of the different types of import requirements EAEs must comply with in order to access high-value markets, including tariffs and NTMs such as SPS and TBT requirements. It then highlights ways in which an enterprise can best take advantage of high-value agricultural markets. Finally, it discusses how Sub-Saharan African governments can further facilitate EAEs' ability to bring their products into compliance with food safety and quality standards in high-value markets.","PeriodicalId":378416,"journal":{"name":"International Economic Law eJournal","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132899948","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}

{"title":"Obama, WTO Trade Enforcement, and China","authors":"Stuart S. Malawer","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2798810","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2798810","url":null,"abstract":"This year, President Obama claimed that since he entered office in 2009, his administration filed 20 WTO cases and won every one that was decided. This certainly sounds like a great achievement for U.S. trade enforcement that would reflect a sterling record in the WTO dispute resolution system. But is it a great achievement? It might be, but it is not the whole story. The whole story is much more nuanced and important to understand.","PeriodicalId":378416,"journal":{"name":"International Economic Law eJournal","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129105223","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}

{"title":"Is Investor-State Arbitration ‘Public’?","authors":"J. Álvarez","doi":"10.1093/JNLIDS/IDW019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JNLIDS/IDW019","url":null,"abstract":"The essay critiques prevailing descriptions of investor-state arbitration (ISDS) that see this mechanism as a form of ‘public’ adjudication requiring exclusively ‘public law’ reforms going forward, culminating in, as the European Union has recently suggested in the course of negotiations for the investment chapter of the Trans-Atlantic Partnership, its replacement by a permanent international investment court in lieu of arbitration using party-appointed arbitrators. It is skeptical of the ostensible public/private divide and most of the ten reasons advanced in the literature, premised on that divide, for concluding that the international investment regime, and particularly ISDS, is public. It next critiques ten widely praised public law prescriptions for change to the regime or ISDS. It concludes with ten broad lessons for why ISDS, in its current form, is best viewed as a ‘hybrid’ between public and private.","PeriodicalId":378416,"journal":{"name":"International Economic Law eJournal","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128025404","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}

{"title":"Case Study: Burlington Resources Inc. v Ecuador/Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v Ecuador","authors":"C. Binder, Jane A. Hofbauer","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2810062","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2810062","url":null,"abstract":"The following case study - drafted for the 2016 ILA Committee meeting - is a unique example for the triangular relationship between investors, states and indigenous communities, and has been investigated both from an investment law and human rights perspective. It thus bears particular relevance in delineating the scope of the rights and obligations of the respective parties in the context of resource development projects/foreign investments which have an impact on indigenous communities.","PeriodicalId":378416,"journal":{"name":"International Economic Law eJournal","volume":"83 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133097861","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}