When Did The Asean Comprehensive Investment Agreement Come Into Effect

CélinePILON > When Did The Asean Comprehensive Investment Agreement Come Into Effect
Non classé / 15 avril 2021 / Posted by celine

149 Dolzer, Rudolf, « Indirect expropriations: new developments? » (2002) 11 Env. L.J. 64 to 79Google Scholar. See also Reinisch, « Expropriation, » supra note 143 at 444-447. An explanation of the « sole effect » doctrine can be found in arbitration.B. Tippetts v. TAMS-AFFA Consulting Engineers of Iran (1984) 6 Cl. Trib. 219Google Scholar. CFIA Section 142, Article 17, paragraph 1, which deals with environmental measures, is similar to the « general exception clauses » contained in other AIs, such as the Energy Charter Treaty, Article 24, and the Canadian ILO model, Article 10, online: . Two former ASEAN investment frameworks, the ASEAN Investment Zone Agreement (AIA) and the Investment Guarantee Agreements (IGA), form the basis of the ASEAN agreement on large-scale investment.

The CFIA is improving the two previous agreements in a number of areas through 59 Articles 5 and 6 acia, which cover the « authorization » and « implementation » of investments. On the other hand, the physical provisions of the IGA did not extend to accreditation/establishment. For the extension of maintenance and treatment standards for MFN to the pre-arrival phase, see z.B. UNCTAD, IIA Vol. 1, 47-168-169, 194-195. In order to promote the ASEAN region as an integrated investment space providing favourable conditions for national and international investment, all Member States agree on the CFIA: 9 Ibid. See also Sornarajah, supra note 5 at 183-185. Another concern for investment contract arbitration procedures is: that the « new generation » of ILO has been completed in recent years, this may result in arbitration decisions inconsistent with the case law on the application of older bits: see UNCTAD, Investor-State Dispute Settlement and Impact on Investment Rulemaking, UNCTAD/ITE/IIA/IIA/2007/3 (Geneva: UNCTAD, 2007) at 92-93Goolargle. The host government is required to offer protection and security to all investments in the event of physical danger (for example. B, in the event of a riot or demonstration).

In the event of losses due to armed conflict, conflict or similar events, host countries must compensate the investors concerned on a non-discriminatory basis. In limited circumstances, capital transactions may also generally be limited when the International Monetary Fund (IMF) requests it to preserve the balance of payments or when capital movements in the host country may cause serious economic or financial disruption. 122 United States v. Canada (1941) 3 R.I.A.A. 1907Google Scholar (`Trail Smelter Case`). Principle 21 was also reaffirmed by ASEAN members within the framework of the « generally accepted principles of international law »: see Article 20, paragraph 1, of the 1985 Convention on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, online: .