• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제57권
• /
• pp.61-78
• /
• 2013

The purpose of this study is to clarify the standard of fair and equitable treatment. Although most international investment treaties prescribe fair and equitable treatment that is the obligation to provide fair and equitable treatment to foreign investor, there is no clear definition and specific elements of fair and equitable treatment. Through the arbitral award cases we can find that tribunals have interpreted to include six principles; Due process & Protection from denial of justice, Good faith, Reasonableness & Nondiscrimination, Compliance with contractual obligation, Full protection and security, Transparency & Protection of the investor's legitimate expectations. This study suggest that host countries and investors focus on international trends concerning investment disputes in order to avoid future disputes. So future disputes can be prevented and prepared in advance.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제22권3호
• /
• pp.187-213
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this article is to examine Fair and Equitable Treatment in International Investment Agreements. Most BITs and other investment treaties provide for FET of foreign investments. Today, this concept is the most frequently invoked standard in investment disputes. It is also the standard with the highest practical relevance: a majority of successful claims pursued in international arbitration are based on a violation of the FET standard. The concept of FET is not new but has appeared in international documents for some time. Some of these documents were nonbinding others entered into force as multilateral or bilateral treaties. Considerable debate has surrounded the question of whether the FET standard merely reflects the internationalminimum standard, as contained in customary international law, or offers an autonomous standard that is additional to general international law. As a matter of textual interpretation, it seems implausible that a treaty would refer to a well-known concept like the "minimum standard of treatment in customary international law" by using the expression "fair and equitable treatment." Broad definitions or descriptions are not the only way to gauge the meaning of an elusive concept such as FET. Another method is to identify typical factual situations to which this principle has been applied. An examination of the practice of tribunals demonstrates that several principles can be identified that are embraced by the standard of fair and equitable treatment. Some of the cases discussed clearly speak to the central roles of transparency, stability, and the investor's legitimate expectations in the current understanding of the FET standard. Other contexts in which the standard has been applied concern compliance with contractual obligations, procedural propriety and due process, action in good faith, and freedom from coercion and harassment. In short, meeting the investor's central legitimate concern of legal consistency, stability, and predictability remains a major, but not the only, ingredient of an investment-friendly climate in which the host state in turn can reasonably expect to attract foreign investment.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제22권2호
• /
• pp.103-124
• /
• 2012

Because the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (Korea-U.S. FTA) and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) have an overlapping contracting party, the United States, their provisions have much in common. The investment chapters of these agreements, especially, show many similarities, and thanks to these similarities, it is likely that the Korea-U.S. FTA arbitration tribunal for investor-state disputes regarding the environment will put great weight on the NAFTA tribunals' interpretations of those similar provisions. Since the NAFTA tribunals have already handled many environment-related arbitration cases, their interpretations will help heighten the predictability of environment-related Korea-U.S. FTA arbitration cases. This paper analyzes the environment-related NAFTA cases in which the tribunal has issued an award, which are the Metalclad case, S.D. Myers case, Waste Management case, Methanex case, Glamis Gold case, and Chemtura case. According to this analysis, the most controversial NAFTA provisions have been Article 1102 (national treatment), Article 1105 (minimum treatment standard, fair and equitable treatment), and Article 1110 (expropriation). The NAFTA tribunals applied the requirement of these articles in a strict manner, reducing the possibility of finding a violation. After the aforementioned analysis, this paper proceeds to compare the national treatment, minimum treatment standard (fair and equitable treatment), and expropriation provisions of the Korea-U.S. FTA and NAFTA and to predict the impact that the environment-related awards under NAFTA can have on environment-related Korea-U.S. FTA cases. It is expected that the NAFTA interpretations of the national treatment and minimum treatment provisions are likely be used as they are, but not the interpretations of expropriation, because of the differences in the expropriation provisions of the two agreements.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제19권1호
• /
• pp.121-145
• /
• 2009

South Korea has investment agreements such as FTAs, BITs with several countries. Up to now, no single case has been registered against the Korean government on breach of investment agreements, but it is likely that the number of such cases would increase. Therefore, an investor-state dispute settlement system, an arbitral procedure by which a foreign investor may seek compensation of damage against the host country, is gaining its importance. The provision of the ISDS has been one of the hottest issues in Korea while the Kor-US FTA was being signed. In this respect, with the growing number of regional agreements such as BITs and FTAs, a careful scrutiny on the ISDS is necessary for Korea. I have therefore studied theoretically subjects including the National Treatment(NT), the Most-Favored Nation(MFN), Fair and Equitable Treatment and Expropriation - those that have been the objects of protection on investors. And I have analyzed ICSID arbitral awards and provided implications. In the ICSID arbitral awards, the Fair and Equitable Treatment turned out to be the most recognized violation on investors by the host State in terms of investor protection. On the other hand, Indirect Expropriation - a matter of which public anxiety was shown led by civic groups - was not generally recognized in arbitral awards. This study is written for sake of governments, local autonomous entities and public enterprises that are in charge of FTAs and BITs.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제47권
• /
• pp.3-24
• /
• 2010

The contours of the definition of an indirect expropriation are not precisely drawn. In some recent ICSID decision, tribunals have interpreted the concept of indirect expropriation narrowly and have preferred to find a violation of the standard of fair and equitable treatment. Thus, I analyzed the three Requirements of Indirect Expropriation basis of ICSID Cases as below. First, the effect of measure upon the economic benefit value as well as upon the control over the investment will be the key question when it comes to deciding whether an indirect expropriation has taken place. Whenever this effect is substantial and lasts for a significant period of time, it will be assumed prima facie that a taking of the property has occurred. Second, legitimate play a key role in the interpretation of the fair and equitable treatment standard. But they also found entry into the law governing indirect expropriation. Finally, the duration of a government measure affecting the interests of a foreign investor is important for the assessment of whether an expropriation has occurred.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제36권
• /
• pp.87-109
• /
• 2007

This Comment explores the ICSID case of CMS Gas Transmission Company v. Argentine Republic, awarded on May 12, 2005. The Part II of this Comment first describes the relevant facts of the case including the some background for readers' understanding and the Part III summaries the claimant's requests and the decisions rendered by the Arbitral Tribunal in the Award. At Part IV, the Comment addresses the issue of determinating laws applicable to the merits of dispute in case that the parties of the case have not chosen a governing law, and at Part V, takes a close look into three main issues of (i) the indirect expropriation of the investment, (ii) the breach of fair and equitable treatment and (iii) the protections under umbrella clauses. In this CMS case, we see first that while the Tribunal affirmed that any indirect expropriation can occur from incidental interference depriving the foreign investor of the use or reasonable-to-be-expected economic benefit even if not necessarily to the obvious benefit of the host State, the Tribunal denied the occurrence of indirect expropriation in this case by holding that the Government of Argentina has not breached the standard of protection laid down in the Treaty. Secondly, however, regarding the issue of fair and equitable treatment, we see that the Tribunal, finding Argentina's breach of obligations, affirmed that the foreign investor can expect the host State to act in a consistent manner, free from ambiguity and totally transparently in its relations with the foreign investor, which can give the foreign investor certain degree of foreseeability. Thirdly and finally, we see that, on base of the effect of the umbrella clause, the Tribunal recognized the obligation of the host State undertaken not to freeze the tariff regime or subject it to price controls and not to alter the basic rules governing contracts between the foreign investor and the host State without the first's written consent. However, the protection under the umbrella clause is available only when there is a specific breach of rights and obligations under BIT or a violation of contract rights protected under BIT.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제71권
• /
• pp.195-216
• /
• 2016

In determining the content of the FET standard, the tribunals stated protection of investor's legitimate expectations, due process and denial of justice, transparency, discrimination and arbitrariness, good faith, etc. The most major elements of the FET standard is the protection of the investor's legitimate and reasonable expectations. It is necessary to consider whether it is possible to what the expectations of investors are protected as legitimate and it is formed under any circumstances. If host state frustrate investor's legitimate expectations, it found a breach of the FET. The host state's specific assurance may reinforce investor's expectations, but such explicit statement is not always necessary. The host state must preserve a stable environment for investments. However, It must not be understood as the inalterability of the host state's legal framework. It implies that the host state's subsequent changes should be made consistently and predictably. The host state is entitled to exercise a reasonable regulatory authority to respond to changing circumstances in the public purpose. Therefore, whether the violation FET shall be determined through a balanced against the investor's legitimate expectations and the host state's reasonable regulatory exercise in the public interest. And investor should keep in mind that the principle of proportionality is applied unless host state provides stabilization clause or similar commitments to investor. Also host state should establish the basis of an argument about reasonable regulatory authority for public interest.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제32권3호
• /
• pp.3-27
• /
• 2022

Climate change is a man-made disaster that has become a major global concern today. With increasingly visible symptoms of climate change in recent years, it has become evident that climate action can no longer be dismissed as a mere matter of choice, but as a matter of survival for the human being. To address the impending climate change crisis in a collaborative and sustainable manner, the international community has been taking various measures including Kyoto protocol and the Paris Agreement. With respect to the private investor's project investment in line with international agreements on climate change, recently we have seen multiple legal judgments which clearly indicate the subject of judicial responsibility for investment in climate change related projects. However, in order to hold judicial responsibility occurring during the implementation of climate change related projects, a causal relationship between the responsible entities and clear responsibility must be demonstrated, and applicable institutional arrangements need to be arranged. It may be the right time for global community to consider shifting not only to human ethical obligations but also legal obligations. In this regard, concerned governments should consider legislating arbitration laws, regulations, and institutional arrangements in more specific and applicable manner.

• 한국콘텐츠학회논문지
• /
• 제13권12호
• /
• pp.702-714
• /
• 2013

한중일은 새로운 경제성장을 위한 고민과 더불어 외자를 유치함에 있어 새로운 도전과 어려움에 직면해 있다. 향후 한중일 FTA는 3국간의 투자를 더욱 촉진 할 것으로 기대되고 있다. 이 논문은 한중일 3국간의 투자에 관한 법적체계와 제약요소 및 투자규칙에 관한 연구를 하였다. 3국간의 무역경제 관계와 투자흐름을 검토하고, 이를 배경으로 3국의 외국투자에 관한 법적체계 및 투자규칙에 관한 검토를 통하여 상대국에 있어서 투자에 관한 주요한 제약이 무엇인지, 향후 한중일 FTA는 3국간의 투자를 더욱 촉진하기 위해서는 한중일 FTA 투자 장(章)에 포함해야 할 것이 무엇인지를 제시하고자 하였다. 한중일 FTA는 3방향의 투자 흐름을 원활화하고 3국간에 투자자와 투자보호를 강화하기위한 효과적인 수단이 될 것이다. 이 점에서 향후 한중일 FTA 투자 장은 내국민 대우, 최혜국대우, 특정조치의 이행요구의 금지 및 경영진이나 이사회의 국적 요건, 자금의 이전, 세이프가드 조치, 수용 및 보상, 손실에 대한 보상, 공정 형평 대우, 투자자 대 국가의 분쟁 해결 및 3국 간 합의 된 다른 요소를 포함해야한다.

• 한국응급구조학회지
• /
• 제13권1호
• /
• pp.19-33
• /
• 2009

Purpose : To check the legal relation between rescue team and patient as well as legal responsibility for patient's damage intentionally or erroneously caused by rescue member, a public official, in the performance of relevant job ; to prevent legal dispute over rescue team and to present program for fair settlement of dispute and equitable and feasible burden of damage. Method : First, the legal principle of Civil Law, Criminal Law and Administrative Law related to the theme of this research will be investigated around research by literature. Second, the case of dispute related to rescue team will be introduced. Result: 1. If 119 rescue members as a public official intentionally or erroneously cause damage to patient in the performance of job, they shall bear civil, criminal and administrative responsibility. They shall bear civil responsibility for indemnity for damage due to default or tort. The typical criminal responsibility includes accidental homicide arising out of duty, preparing falsified official document, dereliction of duty, etc. In the administrative side, the state is responsible for indemnity for peculiar status of the rescue member, public official. 2. Though raising civil petition or legal dispute over unsatisfactory rescue service may be reasonable to guarantee the right of nation, such action may cause stress to rescue member as well as may lead to mental shrinking and defensive attitude only to take the basic first aid treatment which has low possibility of mistake instead of active first aid treatment so as to avoid legal responsibility. 3. The program that may prevent legal dispute over 119 rescue team includes expansion of manpower specialized in first aid treatment, enhancement of education on legal environment, development and application of standard job guideline, formation of mutual trust with patient, detailed explanation, preparing and keeping minute record, improvement of the rescue members' ability of first aid treatment and development of medical instruction mode. Conclusion : The best policy is to prevent legal dispute. If it is impossible to basically exclude the possibility of dispute, however, we need to make effort to minimize the occurrence, settle fairly and divide damage equitably and feasibly. To improve the preventible death rate of our first aid system to the level of advanced country, 119 rescue team which is in charge of the stage before hospital needs to positively enforce special first aid by improving the qualitative level of rescue service and to strive to prevent legal dispute that may occur in the process.