Suchergebnisse

Das Buch liefert einen Überblick über System, Entwicklungslinien und wichtige Rechtsvorschriften. Zudem wird die Vernetzung der internationalen, europäischen und nationalen Rechtsebenen sichtbar gemacht. Schwerpunkte sind die Wirtschaftsverfassung, das Wettbewerbs-, Regulierungs-, Wirtschaftsaufsichts-, Wirtschaftspolizei- und Wirtschaftslenkungsrecht sowie das Recht der öffentlichen Unternehmen.

The fate of law is change. Change is the law of nature. Law goes on changing in accordance with the demands of society. International Law(Jus Gentium) does not form any exception to the above truth. The 20th Century has witnessed an ever-accelerating rhythm of change; the scientific and technological developments have unleashed political, economic, social and cultural forces which are transforming the society at an increasing rate.1 International Law has undergone complete changes after the two World Wars and it has revolutionised itscorpus during the current century. The whole of recorded history of International Law has been a process of revolution or at least of change, for, in no one era has mankind stood completely still.2 International Law has been changing with the facts of international life. Modern International Law has experienced new developments and trends. The new International Law, undoubtedly, has indicated the norms and rules that have evolved since the Second World War and more particularly since the creation of the United Nations. The new International Law has already manifested itself in the Charter of the United Nations. The United Nations Charter marked a significant step forward in the development of International Law. It marked the beginning of a new era in interstate relations. It was a sincere effort to restructure interstate relations with a view to achieving a new world order. It is because of the impact of the United Nations and of its specialized agencies, a number of significant developments have taken place in the field of International Law.

Aus dem Inhalt: Müller-Gatermann, Aktuelle deutsche Abkommenspolitik Czakert, Neue Entwicklungen beim abkommensrechtlichen Informationsaustausch Schwenke, Steuerliche Zulässigkeit nationaler Treaty-overriding- Regelungen? Schnittker, Anwendung der DBA auf Personengesellschaften Ditz, Management-, Dienstleistungs- und Vertreterbetriebsstätte – Quo vadis Art. 5 OECD-MA? Roth, Konsequenzen aus der Änderung des Art. 7 OECD-MA zur Betriebsstättengewinnermittlung Schönfeld, Nationale Regelungen zur Vermeidung missbräuchlicher Inanspruchnahme von DBA Kessler, Neuausrichtung der grenzüberschreitenden Verlustverrechnung aus Sicht der Finanzverwaltung

In a cable dated July 9, 1951, from Foreign Minister Bagher Kazemi to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Iran withdrew its acceptance of compulsory jurisdiction by the International Court of Justice. Referring specifically to the Court's order on interim measures (issued on July 5), the cable stated that the Court "had shaken the confidence" which the Iranian government and people had always had in international justice. The Iranian note made four specific points: first, the Iranian declaration (ratified on September 19, 1932) accepting the compulsory jurisdiction of the Permanent Court, and extended to the International Court of Justice under the latter's Statute, extended such jurisdiction only to disputes relating to the application of treaties and conventions. The Declaration excluded questions within the exclusive jurisdiction of Iran. Agreements or contracts under private and domestic law (such as concessions to work certain sources of natural wealth, commercial matters, and matters relating to Iran's sovereign rights) "were and still are excluded" from compulsory jurisdiction of the Court. Second, the note pointed out that the concession granted the "former Anglo-Iranian Oil Company" in 1933 did not mention the United Kingdom in any capacity and reserved no rights or powers to that government.