性能要求:是否有禁止性能要求的真正原因?

O. Magomedova
{"title":"性能要求:是否有禁止性能要求的真正原因?","authors":"O. Magomedova","doi":"10.1163/24689017_00401008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent international economic agreements between the EU and other non-EU states have included prohibitions on performance requirements (PRs). Although the provisions prohibiting such requirements typically specify the types of prohibited practices, the essence of PRs, and the reasons for their prohibition remain unclear. The recent concept of PRs has crept into the international legal framework seemingly without a firm theoretical foundation and without any roots in customary international law. It had initially been used in bilateral treaties as the broad term for designating certain policy tools which States were prepared to relinquish so as to promote a better investment regime. Noting the lack of a generally recognised definition of PRs, this article provides an overview of scholars’ opinions and adjudicators’ reasoning on this subject, highlighting certain significant differences in approach. Guided by various examples from arbitral practice and national legislation of selected countries, this article seeks to distil the inherent features of PRs and to rationalise the internationally-prevailing views on this subject. In summary, the article gives an assessment of the prohibition of PRs and considers the reasons for which States may seek to eliminate these types of measures.","PeriodicalId":164842,"journal":{"name":"European Investment Law and Arbitration Review Online","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Performance Requirements: Is there a Real Reason for their Prohibition?\",\"authors\":\"O. Magomedova\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/24689017_00401008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Recent international economic agreements between the EU and other non-EU states have included prohibitions on performance requirements (PRs). Although the provisions prohibiting such requirements typically specify the types of prohibited practices, the essence of PRs, and the reasons for their prohibition remain unclear. The recent concept of PRs has crept into the international legal framework seemingly without a firm theoretical foundation and without any roots in customary international law. It had initially been used in bilateral treaties as the broad term for designating certain policy tools which States were prepared to relinquish so as to promote a better investment regime. Noting the lack of a generally recognised definition of PRs, this article provides an overview of scholars’ opinions and adjudicators’ reasoning on this subject, highlighting certain significant differences in approach. Guided by various examples from arbitral practice and national legislation of selected countries, this article seeks to distil the inherent features of PRs and to rationalise the internationally-prevailing views on this subject. In summary, the article gives an assessment of the prohibition of PRs and considers the reasons for which States may seek to eliminate these types of measures.\",\"PeriodicalId\":164842,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Investment Law and Arbitration Review Online\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Investment Law and Arbitration Review Online\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/24689017_00401008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Investment Law and Arbitration Review Online","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24689017_00401008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

最近欧盟和其他非欧盟国家之间的国际经济协议包括对绩效要求(pr)的禁止。虽然禁止此类规定的条文通常会指明被禁止的做法类型,但PRs的实质和禁止这些做法的原因仍不清楚。最近,PRs概念悄悄进入国际法律框架,似乎没有坚实的理论基础,也没有任何习惯国际法的根源。它最初在双边条约中被用作指定某些政策工具的广义术语,各国准备放弃这些政策工具以促进更好的投资制度。注意到缺乏普遍认可的pr定义,本文概述了学者们对这一主题的观点和裁判的推理,突出了方法上的某些重大差异。本文以选定国家的仲裁实践和国家立法中的各种例子为指导,试图提炼出pr的内在特征,并使国际上对这一主题的普遍看法合理化。总之,该条对禁止pr进行了评估,并考虑了各国可能寻求消除这类措施的理由。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Performance Requirements: Is there a Real Reason for their Prohibition?
Recent international economic agreements between the EU and other non-EU states have included prohibitions on performance requirements (PRs). Although the provisions prohibiting such requirements typically specify the types of prohibited practices, the essence of PRs, and the reasons for their prohibition remain unclear. The recent concept of PRs has crept into the international legal framework seemingly without a firm theoretical foundation and without any roots in customary international law. It had initially been used in bilateral treaties as the broad term for designating certain policy tools which States were prepared to relinquish so as to promote a better investment regime. Noting the lack of a generally recognised definition of PRs, this article provides an overview of scholars’ opinions and adjudicators’ reasoning on this subject, highlighting certain significant differences in approach. Guided by various examples from arbitral practice and national legislation of selected countries, this article seeks to distil the inherent features of PRs and to rationalise the internationally-prevailing views on this subject. In summary, the article gives an assessment of the prohibition of PRs and considers the reasons for which States may seek to eliminate these types of measures.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信