• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of World Investment & Trade; Law, Economics, Politics >Comparative Public Law at the Dawn of Investment Treaty Arbitration: Saar Papier Vertriebs GmbHv. Republic of Poland
【24h】

Comparative Public Law at the Dawn of Investment Treaty Arbitration: Saar Papier Vertriebs GmbHv. Republic of Poland

机译：投资条约仲裁黎明时的比较公法：Saar Papier Vertriebs GmbHv。波兰共和国

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

In January 2014, two arbitral awards dating from 1994 and 1995 were released by the Republic of Poland following a request under that state's freedom of information law. The two awards, on jurisdiction and merits respectively, were issued by an ad hoc tribunal convened under uncitral Arbitration Rules in the case of Saar Papier Vertriebs GmbH v. Poland, finding the respondent in violation of the Germany-Poland bit. This case is believed to be only the second investment treaty dispute ever to have been resolved, following aapl v. Sri Lanka in 1990. With the extensive uptake of investment treaty arbitration since then, the two awards present a fascinating picture of the system in its infancy. In particular, in drawing on domestic administrative law to interpret the Germany-Poland treaty's provisions on indirect expropriation, the Tribunal hints at the 'comparative public law' approach now prominent in the field. However, as discussed in this case comment, the Saar Papier awards probably do not represent the careful and prescient adoption of a thought-provoking methodology for interpreting investment treaties. Instead, they are better viewed simply as pragmatic compromises worked out by arbitrators unfamiliar with the new context in which they found themselves.
机译：2014年1月，波兰共和国根据该国信息自由法的要求，发布了1994年至1995年的两项仲裁裁决。这两个裁决分别是关于管辖权和案情的，是由一个仲裁庭根据萨特拉·帕皮尔·韦特里布斯有限公司诉波兰一案召集的，由一个特设法庭裁定，裁定被告违反了德国-波兰法律。据信，此案是继1990年aapl诉斯里兰卡案之后解决的第二个投资条约争议。此后，随着投资条约仲裁的广泛采用，这两个裁决在其系统中展现了该系统的迷人景象。婴儿期特别是，在利用国内行政法来解释《德国-波兰条约》关于间接征收的规定时，法庭暗示了该领域目前比较普遍的“比较公法”方法。但是，正如本案例评论中所讨论的那样，萨尔·帕皮尔奖可能并不代表审慎，预先采用了发人深省的方法来解释投资条约。取而代之的是，将它们更好地看作仅仅是仲裁员对他们发现自己所处的新环境不熟悉的务实妥协。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号