Suchergebnisse

Abstract
This article focuses on the proportionality analysis carried out by international investment tribunals when the protection of foreign investment adversely impacts the protection of human rights. International investment arbitrators are increasingly called to adjudicate awards which require a 'balancing' between the so-called rights of investors, protected as they are by relevant international investment agreements (iia), and the rights of third parties affected by foreign investment. Such balancing often entails, at its core, a controversial juxtaposition between investment protections and human rights protections. In this article, I argue that a balancing between investors' rights and human rights is neither possible nor desirable. This argument is crucial to demystify existing assumptions surrounding the use of balancing and proportionality in international investment arbitration as a way of successfully reconciling competing interests as well as conflicting protection obligations vested upon a host State.

On January 27, 2017, the Indonesian Government started building a new international airport in Yogyakarta Province, named Yogyakarta International Airport (YIA) to replace Adisucipto International Airport. YIA is located near the beach, which means that an awareness of natural disasters, such as coastal flooding, is essential. One of the causes of sea water flooding is land subsidence phenomenon. This land subsidence phenomenon can be monitored by using Sentinel-1 Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) data. To monitor the crustal deformation, the data used in this research are from years 2016-2019. The data were processed through LiCSBAS software which is published by the COMET in the UK. In the processing scheme, interferograms with many unwrapping errors are detected and removed via loop closure. Reliable time series and velocities are extracted using several noise indices, with the help of masking. The results show the subsidence phenomenon in the YIA area (up to 25 mm).

The economic benefits many African countries derive from international
wildlife tourism are very few, especially when viewed from existing
potentials in terms of resources and uniqueness. African wildlife tourism
has natural barriers to entry and thus is basically a monopolistic market.
However, the countries have done virtually nothing to take advantage of
this situation. Rather than focusing on cost recovery or revenue
maximisation, the governments should therefore aim at maximising
profits from international tourism. Uganda is the case study of this paper
in this regard. Data collected from a travel cost survey indicates that in
1997, even under uniform pricing, Ugandan's profit from gorilla
tracking in the Bwindi Impenetrable National Park alone could have
been increased by between USD 30,000 and USD 220,000 (depending
on assumptions about social costs). Besides, unlike most government
revenue sources, monopoly prices on international tourism do not
impose deadweight losses on the domestic economy.

Die Gründung von Zwischengesellschaften zum Zwecke des Treaty Shopping steht unter dem Verdacht des Gestaltungsmissbrauchs. Hiergegen richten sich spezielle Missbrauchsnormen wie 50d Abs. 3 EStG und die "Limitation on Benefits" Klausel des Art. 28 DBAUSA, die in jüngerer Zeit fortentwickelt wurden. Das Buch untersucht diese Missbrauchsvorbehalte grundlegend und beleuchtet dabei ganz besonders, nach welchen Maßstäben sich überhaupt eine Gestaltung als "missbräuchlich" bezeichnen lassen muss. Dies umfasst nicht nur die Ebene des nationalen Rechts nach der Neufassung des 42 AO, sondern erfordert eine rechtskreisübergreifende Betrachtung unter Einbeziehung des europäischen Steuerrechts und des internationalen Steuerrechts im engeren Sinne. Insoweit ergibt sich gerade für das Treaty Shopping ein vielgestaltiges Bild des Missbrauchs und es lassen sich unterschiedliche Konzeptionen und Maßgaben abstrahieren, die als Maßstäbe zur Bestimmung des Missbrauchscharakters fungieren. Der Autor identifiziert zahlreiche Kollisionen zwischen den einzelnen Maßstäben und zeigt allgemeine Zuordnungskriterien zur Bewältigung dieser Kollisionen auf, sowohl innerhalb der jeweiligen Rechtskreise als auch übergreifend zwischen diesen. Für diejenigen Maßnahmen, die sich spezifisch gegen Treaty Shopping richten, ergibt sich damit zugleich ein Prüfungsmaßstab, an dem sich diese Missbrauchsvorbehalte messen und bewerten lassen. Auf diese Weise möchte dieses Buch nicht nur ihr Verhältnis untereinander und zu 42 AO klären, sondern auch die Frage nach deren Verfassungsmäßigkeit und Unionsrechtskonformität einem Lösungsvorschlag zuführen. Auch auf die jüngste Änderung des 50d Abs. 3 EStG durch das Beitreibungsrichtlinie- Umsetzungsgesetz wird hierbei eingegangen.

The study evaluates the reliability and validity of the Inter-Nation Simulation (INS) as an operating model of international interaction. Reliability is evaluated by comparing correlation coefficients describing patterns of interaction in one series of runs of the INS with coefficients generated during a second series of runs. Of 21 reliability comparisons, 2 were found to differ by a magnitude of .20 or more. Validity is evaluated by comparing coefficients describing patterns of interaction in the combined runs of the INS with coefficients observed in data from the international system chosen as a referent. Of 21 validity comparisons, 10 were found to differ by a magnitude of .20 or more. These 10 comparisons, all involving relationships represented by high correlations in the referent system but low correlations in the INS, are interpreted as mispredictions of the INS—i. e., as relationships which exist in the referent system, but which the INS fails to gener ate. Further analysis aimed at isolating the particular relationships and variables involved in these mispredictions is reported as a basis for revising the INS model.

General exception clauses are increasingly gaining relevance in investment arbitration. Included in investment treaties to strengthen the right to regulate, these mechanisms have received mixed reactions in the literature. While being unacknowledged in arbitral practice for a long time, recent cases illustrate the difficulties in interpreting and applying general exception clauses. This contribution will reflect the role of general exceptions for investment treaties and its perception in the literature. Moreover, it analyzes some of the most pertinent issues in case law, such as its relationship to other defences in arbitral proceedings as well as the question whether successful invocation precludes compensation.