메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
이현택 (고려대학교)
저널정보
연세법학회(구 연세법학연구회) 연세법학 연세법학 제38호
발행연도
2021.12
수록면
397 - 436 (40page)
DOI
http://dx.doi.org/10.33606/YLA.38.13

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
Protection against indirect expropriation of foreign investment is often highly controversial as it may be perceived as an undue restraint on the host state’s ability to implement legitimate public policy. Further, the distinction between compensable indirect expropriation and non-compensable government regulatory action under the international investment law is murky, engendering much confusion and unpredictability. Such unclarity has led arbitrators in investor-to-state dispute cases to exercise wide discretion in determination of indirect expropriation claims, and some arbitrators exercised the discretion to construe the concept of indirect expropriation expansively. In response, some states began to curb arbitrator’s discretion through careful drafting of treaty language on expropriation. The investment chapter of the Korea-US Free Trade Agreement that went into effect in 2012 is a good example of such trend. Annex 11-B of the KORUS FTA contains a relatively detailed set of provisions elaborating the definition of indirect expropriation and providing the guidelines on how the concept should and should not be interpreted. To wit, such provisions have tried to circumscribe arbitrator’s discretion to interpret the scope of indirect expropriation expansively. Such provisions surely have provided more clarity on this issue, and thus, added security for the policy space of Korea as the host state. Therefore, Annex 11-B has since become the template for the equivalent interpretative Annexes and expropriation provisions in Korea’s subsequent free trade agreements and BITs. However, it is also true that such approach has limits and its own problems. Ambiguities still remain with respect to some of the phrases and concepts used in such interpretative Annexes, and their textual variations will hinder the development of consistent and coherent arbitration case law on indirect expropriation. Therefore, the ideal solution to the problem of indirect expropriation will be conclusion of a multilateral instrument under which a reliable case law on the understanding of indirect expropriation can be developed.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0