scholarly journals OVERRIDING MANDATORY LAWS IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION

2018 ◽  
Vol 67 (4) ◽  
pp. 903-930 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Kleinheisterkamp
Keyword(s):  
Public Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
Conflict Of Laws ◽  
Party Autonomy ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
Dialectical Relationship ◽  
The Eu

AbstractOverriding mandatory laws present one of the most pervasive and delicate problems of international arbitration because they affect party autonomy in both its substantive and procedural dimensions. The tension between these concepts both in theory and in practice is a classic emanation of the public–private divide, which is particularly problematic in international and transnational settings. This tension is even stronger in the context of economic integration and regulation, such as in the EU Internal Market. This article revisits and conceptualizes the operation of overriding mandatory laws in the context of arbitration from the perspectives of conflict of laws, public law, and EU law. Drawing on the principles of effectiveness and proportionality, it proposes a practical rather than a theoretical solution to the dialectical relationship between private and public interests in legal certainty.

scholarly journals Protection of public interests by narrowing private interests: where is the limit?

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (38) ◽  
pp. 148-157
Author(s):  
Olga Klepikova ◽  
Viktoriia Kachuriner ◽  
Volodymyr Makoda ◽  
Inha Kryvosheyina ◽  
Vadym Popeliuk
Keyword(s):  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
The People ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
Restrictive Measures

The coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) has posed many challenges to the international community. In a pandemic, governments make complex decisions every day (respond quickly to emerging difficulties), implement effective quarantine measures that affect the public and private interests of the people. Such decisions are also made by such supranational entities as the European Union. With this in mind, it is essential to analyze the interaction and balance of private and public interests in EU law in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic. The work aims to analyze the balance between private and public interests in EU law in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic. Research methods are such methods as dialectical, historical, idealization, analysis, synthesis, abstraction, system, formalization, comparison, and modeling. As a result of the study, the authors concluded that the search for a balance between public and private interests is in all areas and mostly applies to human rights and, in a pandemic, these powers are enshrined in major international treaties and national regulations, with reservations about their possible limitation under exceptional circumstances. At the same time, ensuring the balance of private and public interests is possible only if the rule of law is fulfilled in the implementation of restrictive measures, proportionality, and public necessity.

Private and Public Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 574-592
Author(s):  
Thomas W. Merrill
Keyword(s):  
Law And Economics ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Private Law ◽  
General Criterion ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private Ordering ◽  
Public Rights ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Derivatives Of

This chapter explores the relationship between private and public law. In civil law countries, the public-private distinction serves as an organizing principle of the entire legal system. In common law jurisdictions, the distinction is at best an implicit design principle and is used primarily as an informal device for categorizing different fields of law. Even if not explicitly recognized as an organizing principle, however, it is plausible that private and public law perform distinct functions. Private law supplies the tools that make private ordering possible—the discretionary decisions that individuals make in structuring their lives. Public law is concerned with providing public goods—broadly defined—that cannot be adequately supplied by private ordering. In the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, various schools of thought derived from utilitarianism have assimilated both private and public rights to the same general criterion of aggregate welfare analysis. This has left judges with no clear conception of the distinction between private and public law. Another problematic feature of modern legal thought is a curious inversion in which scholars who focus on fields of private law have turned increasingly to law and economics, one of the derivatives of utilitarianism, whereas scholars who concern themselves with public law are increasingly drawn to new versions of natural rights thinking, in the form of universal human rights.

Public Servitudes for the Certain Types of Facilities Placing: Towards a Discussion on Public Interest Presence

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.P. Ushakova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Private Interest ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
Arbitrary Decision ◽  
The Right

From the standpoint of the dominant interest criterion the article examines the justification of the legislator`s decision to apply public law methods in order to regulate relations concerning the use of land for infrastructural facilities placing. The author gives the arguments in favor of understanding the public interest as the interest of the whole society as a system, rather than the interest of an indefinite range of persons or the majority of the population. The author concludes that there is the simultaneous presence in the specified legal relations and private interests of the participants of legal relations, and public interests of society as a system. Both types of interests in these legal relations are important, but in terms of different aspects of the legal impact mechanism. Public interest is important because its realization is the purpose of legal regulation of this type of legal relations, from this point of view it acts as a dominant interest. The private interest of the holder of a public servitude is important as an incentive to attract the efforts of private individuals to achieve a publicly significant goal. The private interest of a land plot owner is important from the point of view of securing the right of ownership. It is substantiated that the public servitude is not an arbitrary decision of the legislator, but an example of application of the incentive method in the land law, which provides a favorable legal regime for a socially useful activity.

Part I Introduction, 1 Introduction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wijckmans Frank ◽  
Tuytschaever Filip
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Private Enforcement ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
The Public ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Public And Private Enforcement ◽  
The Eu

This chapter explains the term ‘vertical agreements’ and what it covers. It addresses a number of general issues that are relevant to the EU competition law treatment of vertical agreements in general. It describes the implementation and the (public and private) enforcement of Article 101 TFEU before and after the entry into force of Regulation 1/2003. The chapter provides the historical background of both Regulation 330/2010 and Regulation 461/2010. In particular, it devotes specific attention to the nature and legal and practical consequences of soft EU competition law (in the form of notices, guidelines, etc) as opposed to hard EU competition law (provisions of primary and secondary EU law).

Europe’s Cosmopolitan Union

2021 ◽  
pp. 204-226
Author(s):  
Bertjan Wolthuis ◽  
Luigi Corrias
Keyword(s):  
Public Law ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
The Other ◽  
Refugee Crisis ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Cosmopolitan Law ◽  
Migration Law ◽  
Legal Condition ◽  
The Eu

The chapter provides a Kantian reading of EU internal market law and the refugee crisis of 2015. The chapter argues that the EU should be viewed as a cosmopolitan union. The authors ask whether EU law, understood as positive cosmopolitan law, can be qualified as an extension of the legal condition, and whether it can be viewed as consistent with the other two parts of public law, especially with the freedom of EU member states which also depend on the possible connection to global, much less extensive, systems of positive cosmopolitan law such as migration law.

1. Introduction

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine Barnard ◽  
Steve Peers
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Job Creation ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Input Legitimacy ◽  
Output Legitimacy ◽  
The Eu

This introductory chapter begins with a discussion of the development of EU law. It then sets out the text’s overarching themes.These can be introduced in the form of two questions: ‘What should the EU be doing?’ and ‘How should the EU go about doing it?’ The first question is linked to the concept of ‘output legitimacy’, that is, the EU proving its value to the public by showing that it is effective in contributing to the achievement of objectives which have wide public support (e.g. economic growth and job creation). The second question is linked to the concept of ‘input legitimacy’, that is, how fair and democratic is the process by which the EU takes decisions.

Approaches to the law applicable to proprietary effects of transactions in securities taken in uniform law: a lesson for the EU

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 711-723
Author(s):  
Michael F Müller
Keyword(s):  
Status Quo ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Conflict Of Laws ◽  
The Status ◽  
Uniform Solution ◽  
Uniform Law ◽  
The Hague ◽  
Securities Trading ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The modern practice of securities trading has led to almost insurmountable tensions with classical conflict-of-laws doctrine. The Hague Securities Convention set out to provide for a new and uniform solution. In a recent communication from the Commission, the topic has resurfaced on the European agenda. Against this background, this article poses the question of whether the discussion around the Convention can serve as a lesson for the European Union (EU). It is submitted that neither the status quo of EU law is satisfactory nor does the adoption of the Convention offer a fully convincing solution but that the problem should be targeted at its root: the outdated concept of some national substantive laws in intermediated securities.

International Arbitration as Private and Public Good

2020 ◽  
pp. 397-420
Author(s):  
Ralf Michaels
Keyword(s):  
Public Good ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Public Law ◽  
State Courts ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Public Nature ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
Dispute Resolution Mechanism

This chapter addresses the private and public nature of international arbitration. International arbitration is often characterized as an exclusively private dispute resolution mechanism, sharply distinguished from litigation, which is viewed as public because it is provided by the state. This is clearest for commercial arbitration. Commercial arbitration is initiated on the basis of a private arrangement: a party cannot be subjected to arbitration unless they agreed to it previously. Investment arbitration is a little more difficult to categorize, given its emergence from public international law, its involvement of states as parties, and the frequency with which it deals with public law measures. Indeed, significant differences exist between commercial and investment arbitration. Nevertheless, it too is characterized as a private dispute resolution mechanism at least in the sense that it is resolved by institutions other than state courts. The chapter then evaluates whether arbitration is a private or public good. It also demonstrates the ways in which adjudication by courts combines elements of private and public goods, before finding a parallel combination of private and public good aspects in international arbitration.

scholarly journals PUBLIC INTEREST IN PUBLIC PROCUREMENT

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 1039-1062
Author(s):  
Vitaly V. Kikavets
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Public Procurement ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Political Regime ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
The Government

The basis of legal relations in public procurement are private and public interests. The purpose of the study is a substantive assessment of the authors hypothesis that the purpose of legal regulation and financial support of public procurement is to satisfy the public interest expressed in the form of a public need for goods, works, and services. The methodological basis of the study rests on historical and systematic approach, analysis, synthesis and comparative-legal methods. The results of the analysis of normative legal acts regulating public procurement, doctrinal literature and practice showed that public interest denounced in the form of public need is realized through public procurement. Public and private interests can be realized exclusively jointly since these needs cannot objectively be met individually. In general, ensuring public as well as private interests boils down to defining and legally securing the rights and obligations of the customer and their officials, which safeguards them in the process of meeting public needs through public procurement. The study revealed the dependence of the essence of public interest on the political regime, which determines the ratio of public and private interests. Public interest in public procurement is suggested to understand as the value-significant selective position of an official or another person authorized by the government, which is expressed in the form of the public need for the necessary benefit; gaining such benefit involves both legal regulation and financial security. The purpose of legal regulation of public procurement is to satisfy public interest. These concepts should be legally enshrined in Law No. 44-FZ.

Public/Private

2020 ◽  
pp. 466-480
Author(s):  
Jean-Bernard Auby
Keyword(s):  
Essential Feature ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Public Domain ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Roman Law ◽  
Private Sphere ◽  
Private Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter examines the distinction between public law and private law. It stresses the importance of being aware of this difference between the public/private and public law/private law dichotomies. The public–private divide is universal even if, from one society to another, it can be conceived differently in certain ways. All human communities have an idea about the relationship between the private sphere and the public domain. By contrast, the distinction between public law and private law is not universal. It may be ignored, rejected, or confined to a very limited sphere of operation as, traditionally, in common law systems. Conversely, the public law/private law distinction may be understood as an essential feature of the juridical world, as was the approach of Roman law, inherited by the continental legal systems.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document