As a consequence of rising environmental concerns, a substantial number of EU member states undertook various programs aimed at subsidizing the renewable energy sector and promoting related foreign (and domestic) investment. During the 2010s, several renewable energy programs were replaced by less favourable legal regimes. These changes led to foreign investors suing the relevant countries, through the controversial investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism reserved solely for foreign investors. The costly nature of ISDS proceedings (such as legal fees and large arbitral awards) could cause a discouraging effect among member states considering similar renewable energy programs. This research thus aimed to examine whether such concerns have potential merit, whether the cases result in a downturn for renewable promotion in the EU. The method for doing so was through investigating two ISDS cases, followed by an analysis of the two affected countries' stance towards renewable energy before, during and after the ISDS process, and briefly discussing what lessons for other states could be found in the rulings. The research's finding was that a clear discouraging effect could not be established in either cases, and that it is unlikely that ISDS will negatively affect renewable energy promotion.
The paper deals with the principle of reciprocity in the field of recognition and enforcement of foreign decisions. The aim is to ascertain the approach of the Czech legal doctrine and the rules of international procedural law in relation to this institute. The issue of reciprocity outside the European judicial area is addressed, as well as the question of whether reciprocity is a non-essential condition in the area of recognition and is interchangeable with other mechanisms affecting this issue.
The study focuses on analyzing conflicts between (international) investment arbitration and the public interest, dividing its contents into five substantive sections. First, it summarizes the common characteristics of international investment arbitration (distinguishing procedural and substantive elements), followed by its most pressing issues (including frequent criticism such as lack of consistency, asymmetrical proceedings, regulatory chill, etc.). Afterwards, selected investment arbitration cases are examined, grouped based on which areas of public interest they affected (environmental protection, employee rights, public health). These cases all hold relevance and offer different insights into the workings of investment arbitration, which serve to illuminate the complex interplay between foreign investor and public interest. The cases also provide the foundation for the study's conclusions, where key observations are made on the central subjects.
After decades of success, investment arbitration has become an extremely controversial topic, riven by multiple allegations and concerns among the experts and various interest groups. In this contribution, we aim to examine the most relevant and severe of these issues, including regulatory chill. Regulatory chill is a purported phenomenon that claims that investment arbitration favors foreign investors, and thus intimidates host states into refusing to implement policies that would contradict with the interests of foreign investors. We not only examine these problems, but also attempt to suggest some potential remedies for alleviating these issues.
Need of private international law arises because the internal laws of different countries differ from each other. If the internal laws of the countries of the world lay down uniform rules, then probably there will not be any need for private international law. But then, difference is not only in the internal laws of the different countries, but also in the private international laws of different countries, on account of which sometimes conflicting decisions are pronounced by the courts of different countries on the same matter. Thus, need for Unification of Private International law Rules arise.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.