International Arbitration

2020 ◽  
pp. 536-553
Author(s):  
Hélène Ruiz Fabri ◽  
Edoardo Stoppioni
Keyword(s):  
International Economic ◽  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Economic Regulation ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Settlement System ◽  
Central Focus ◽  
International Economic Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement System ◽  
The One

This chapter examines some of the methodological elements of feminist approaches to international law to rethink international arbitration. The central focus of a feminist prism appears to be whether international arbitration is subjugated by patriarchal domination structures, bias and injustice, thus mirroring and even reinforcing the idiosyncrasies of international law, especially international economic law. Probably, one could answer yes to all these questions, and this is essentially why the legitimacy of international arbitration is so much at stake. However, the absence of such a dispute settlement system would not necessarily lead to a better situation for international economic regulation: if international law did not regulate resources at all, the international order would be that much more unjust. A feminist deconstruction shows the need for clear, transparent, and well-balanced rules and dispute settlement resolution systems, and not their absence. This direction is the one progressively taken by projects of reform.

Mega-Regional Trade Agreements: CETA, TTIP, and TiSA

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Economic ◽  
Financial Services ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Economic Relations ◽  
Economic Law ◽  
Legal Perspective ◽  
International Economic Law ◽  
Regional Agreements ◽  
The One ◽  
International Experts

The contributions in this volume examine CETA, TTIP, and TiSA as prime examples of ‘mega-regional’ agreements that are central to a new orientation in international economic law in general and EU external economic relations in particular. While concentrating on CETA, TTIP, and TiSA as the main EU instruments in the worldwide turn to regional and mega-regional agreements, the book places these initiatives in the broader context of other mega-regional projects such as TPP. In the first two chapters, this book examines main motivations for negotiating mega-regional agreements and changing conceptions of international economic law. In nine further contributions, international experts examine sectoral issues such as the trade, investment, and dispute settlement disciplines envisaged in these ‘mega-regional’ agreements. Moreover, the progress made in intellectual property protection, the problems associated with data protection, disciplines on financial services, human rights, labour and environmental standards, issues of transparency and legitimacy, and the relationship between CETA, TTIP, and TiSA on the one hand and EU law on the other are analysed. Finally, four short contributions discuss fundamental questions surrounding these mega-regional agreements from an economic, a political science, and a legal perspective. The last chapter of this volume summarizes principal conclusions presented in the chapters of the book and highlights themes that recur in them.

The pandemic is delaying solutions to the most pressing problems of global trade while creating new challenges

2020 ◽  
pp. 22-29
Author(s):  
A. Portanskiy
Keyword(s):  
Global Economy ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Global Trade ◽  
Economic Regulation ◽  
Settlement System ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
New Challenges ◽  
Dispute Settlement System

The article raises the question of the role of Global economic regulation institutions, in particular, the WTO after the Covid-19 pandemic. The author considers the aggravated modern problems of the WTO, and focuses on the crisis of the Organization that arose in December 2019 in connection with the suspension of the appellate body functioning in the WTO dispute settlement system. The author also tries to identify new challenges of the XXI century for the Global economy, regulatory institutions, as well as for Russia.

Conclusion

2020 ◽  
pp. 179-182
Author(s):  
Carlo de Stefano
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
The State ◽  
Settlement System ◽  
Dispute Settlement System ◽  
Peculiar Nature

The conclusions encapsulate one of the central messages of the book, namely its emphasis on the logical, technical, and ‘objective’ tenets of the international rules of attribution of conduct to States. Such a peculiar nature is held to justify their pedagogic role and influence in the treatment under international law of the ‘State’ (i.e. its organs, instrumentalities, and ‘private’ agents) somehow independently of the design of a given dispute settlement system or of the proper law applicable to the objective element of liability, so as to ensure coherent resolutions of attribution issues by different international law adjudicators.

scholarly journals ‘Regional Trade Courts’ in the Shadow of the WTO Dispute Settlement System: The Paradox of Two Courts

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-49
Author(s):  
Yenkong Ngangjoh-Hodu
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Settlement System ◽  
Regional Trade ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
Dispute Settlement System

As of May 2018, over 650 notifications of RTAs had been received by the WTO Secretariat. Of these, 287 were in force. While the content of the WTO DSU has largely been replicated in most of the ‘regional trade courts’ adjudicatory bodies, emerging features of some of these RTAs are substantially out of line with the WTO DSU. While some RTAs cover aspects currently alien to the WTO, the degree of liberalisation contained within others seems remarkably deeper than under the WTO. Two distinct questions are therefore addressed in this article. The first is whether the proliferation of RTAs threatens in any way the existence of the WTO dispute settlement system, while the second concerns the extent to which this fragmented patchwork of ‘regional trade courts’ contributes to the development of international law. In order to tackle these issues, the article will first explore existing international rules relating to regional trade arrangements.

scholarly journals No Provision Left Behind – Law of the Sea Convention’s Dispute Settlement System and Obligations Erga Omnes

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 519-547
Author(s):  
Eirini-Erasmia Fasia
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Community ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Settlement System ◽  
Left Behind ◽  
Community Interest ◽  
The Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement System

Abstract The article argues that the Law of the Sea Convention’s (LOSC) dispute settlement system (DSS) is attuned only to certain types of disputes (bilateral) and does not allow for the effective enforcement of obligations erga omnes reflected in the Convention. Mechanisms established to address enforcement of communitarian norms specifically are scarce in international law and the traditional bilateral structure of adjudicatory dispute settlement circumscribes the ability of states to act as advocates of the international community to which obligations erga omnes are owed. The article identifies the obligations erga omnes reflected in the LOSC and assesses the extent to which its dispute settlement framework is suited to address their breach. It is submitted that some of the community interest obligations of the LOSC are “left behind” by the function of the system itself.

Mexico – Tax Measures on Soft Drinks and Other Beverages (Complainant: United States of America)

2019 ◽  
Vol 181 ◽  
pp. 436-487
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
International Agreements ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Settlement System ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
Trade Relationship ◽  
Dispute Settlement System ◽  
Settlement Mechanism

Economics, trade and finance — World Trade Organization — General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade — Relationship with other international agreements — North American Free Trade Agreement — Measures allegedly taken contrary to GATT said to be countermeasures responding to violation of NAFTA — WTO dispute settlement mechanismInternational tribunals — Jurisdiction — Discretion not to exercise jurisdiction — Whether inherent power — WTO dispute settlement system — Whether Panel empowered to decline to exercise jurisdiction — Whether dispute between two States parties to NAFTA should be heard by arbitral tribunal under NAFTA rather than by panel under the WTO Dispute Settlement UnderstandingReprisals and countermeasures — Nature and scope — Relationship between countermeasures under international law and measures to secure compliance with laws and regulations within the WTO — Whether falling under GATT Article XX(d)Treaties — Interpretation — Effect — Interpretation of GATT Article XX(d) — Relationship between GATT and other international agreements

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document