A regulação direta ou indireta da transferência de tecnologia pelo Brasil desde o final da década de 50 do século XX nem sempre foi devidamente compreendida. O uso da tributação, com efeitos fiscais e extrafiscais, teve reflexos sobre a atuação do INPI e do Banco Centra do Brasil (BACEN) que permanecem até os dias de hoje, mas tinham como fundamento uma política industrial específica e a limitação dos seus efeitos no balanço de pagamentos do país. O Brasil nunca se fechou totalmente aos investidores estrangeiros, mas sempre utilizou limitações setoriais, posteriormente o registro do ingresso do capital estrangeiro e, por muito tempo, o desincentivo à sua saída por medidas limitadoras ou proibitivas de remessas de dividendos e royalties, até mesmo com o uso da extrafiscalidade. Como o país apenas recentemente realmente prioriza de forma geral a pesquisa e desenvolvimento (P&D) tecnológico, o que resulta em pouca tecnologia gerada internamente, os royalties devidos pelo uso da tecnologia das empresas transnacionais sempre foram objeto de crítica e, consequentemente, medidas limitadoras. Essa atuação regulatória representa um risco político aos investidores, com os acordos bilaterais de investimentos (BITs) sendo os tratados internacionais mais utilizados para afastá-lo. O Brasil, porém, apesar de ter assinado diversos deles, não possui nenhum em vigor. O confronto entre as cláusulas de proteção dos BITs e a política regulatória sobre a transferência de tecnologia e investimento estrangeiro que durante muito tempo vigorou no país representa um caso concreto extremamente interessante para avaliar a aplicação desses tratados e eventuais medidas que os violam, auxiliando, ainda, a compreensão de algumas das medidas regulatórias que permanecem em vigor. / The direct or indirect regulation of technology transfer in Brazil since the late 50s of the twentieth century was not always properly understood. The use of taxation, with fiscal and regulatory purposes, had an impact on the performance of the Brazilian PTO and the Central Bank of Brazil, which remains to this day, but was based on a specific industrial policy and the limitation of its effects on the balance of payments of the country. Brazil never completely closed its market to foreign investors, always using sectoral limitations, then the registration of foreign capital and for a long time the disincentive of its return by limiting or prohibiting profit and royalty remittances, even with the use of regulatory taxes. As the country only recently generally prioritizes technological research and development (R&D), resulting in low technology internally generated, the royalties due for the use of transnational corporations technology has always been an object of criticism and regulatory norms. This regulatory policy is a political risk to investors, with the bilateral investment agreements (BITs) being the international treaties most often used to circumvent it. Brazil, however, despite having signed several of them, has no one in force. The confrontation between the protection clauses of BITs and the regulatory policy on technology transfer and foreign investment that has long prevailed in the country represents an extremely interesting case to evaluate the implementation of these treaties and any measures that violate them, also helping to understand some of the regulatory measures that remain in force

The purpose of this thesis is to offer a complex analysis of newly rising concept of the environmental provisions, with a particular emphasis on China and its deteriorating state of environment. The thesis is composed of eight chapters. The first chapter deals with the core problem of the environmental provisions, that is the colliding nature of the efforts to implement the environmental regulation in the international investment law. The following two chapters address the legal framework of the environmental provisions and the main actors in the field. Chapter four is concerned with the analysis of the material and formal sources of Chinese domestic environmental and investment law, which has been amended recently in reaction to the dramatically deteriorating environment in the country and which prompted the proliferation and greenization of the Chinese bilateral investment treaties. Chapter five proceeds with the analysis of the environmental provisions, their genesis, terminological delimitation and introduction of their typologies. The sixth chapter is dedicated to the analysis of the approach of China towards environmentally responsible investing. Chapter seven proceeds with detailed explanation of the particular types of the environmental provisions, which have been incorporated into the...

Magister Legum - LLM

In der vorliegenden Arbeit sollen Argumente und Vorurteile bezüglich der Investor-Staat-Schiedsverfahren untersucht werden. Dafür wurden zugehörige Thesen gebildet, welche im Laufe der Arbeit entweder bestätigt oder widerlegt werden. Als Instrument dafür dient eine quantitative Analyse historischer Falldaten. Die Arbeit unterteilt sich in verschiedene Themenkomplexe, denen jeweils passende Thesen zugeordnet wurden.:1. Einleitung 2. Allgemeines zu Schiedsverfahren 2.1 These 1 - Die Anzahl der Investor-Staats-Schiedsverfahren in den letzten Jahren stark angestiegen. 2.2 These 2 - Investor-Staats-Schiedsverfahren sind deutlich schneller als herkömmliche Gerichtsverfahren. 3. Verteilung von Klägern und Angeklagten 3.1 These 3 - Investor-Staats-Schiedsverfahren sind ein Instrument für Unternehmen aus reichen Ländern zur Ausbeutung von ärmeren Ländern. 3.1.1 These 3.1 - Es existiert ein Nord-Süd-Gefälle: Unternehmen aus dem Norden verklagen in erster Linie die Länder aus dem Süden. 3.1.2 These 3.2 - „Eine Krähe hackt der anderen kein Auge aus“ – Investoren aus reichen Staaten verklagen keine anderen reichen Staaten. 3.1.3 These 3.3 - Die USA dominiert die Investor-Staat-Schiedsverfahren. 4. Bilaterale Investitionsschutzabkommen (BITs) 4.1 These 4 - Bilaterale Investitionsschutzabkommen waren der Katalysator für die Entwicklung von Investor-Staats-Schiedsverfahren. 4.2 These 5 - BITs sorgen für Gleichberechtigung zwischen den Partnern im Bereich der Investor-Staats-Schiedsverfahren. 5. Entscheidungen der Schiedsgerichte 5.1 These 6 - Um zu mehr Klagen anzuregen, entscheiden die Schiedsgerichte tendenziell pro Investor. 5.2 These 7 - Kläger aus Industrieländern gewinnen im Schnitt öfter als Kläger aus ärmeren Ländern. 5.3 These 8 - Urteile von Schiedsgerichten sind unumstößlich. Eine Revision ist nicht möglich. 6. Schadenersatzzahlungen bei Investor-Staat-Schiedsverfahren 6.1 These 9 - Die hohen Schadenersatzforderungen und – Zahlungen ruinieren die angeklagten Länder. 6.2 These 10 - Selbst bei Sieg vor Gericht – die Staaten bleiben auf den Kosten sitzen. 7. Weitere Thesen 7.1 These 11 - Investor-Staat-Schiedsverfahren gefährden den Umweltschutz. 7.2 These 12 - Investor-Staat-Schiedsverfahren sind intransparent. 8. Fazit Literaturverzeichnis

L’arbitrage international, outre le recours aux tribunaux de l’État hôte, est la méthode la plus utilisée pour régler les différends relatifs aux investissements étrangers. Plusieurs accords internationaux d’investissement incluent des dispositions ayant trait à l’arbitrage sous l’égide du Centre International pour le Règlement des Différends relatifs aux Investissements (CIRDI) mis en place par la Convention de Washington de 1966. Les tribunaux arbitraux constitués sous l’égide du Centre sont ainsi appelés à trancher des différends qui concernent la conduite d’États hôtes vis-à-vis ses investisseurs étrangers ; leurs décisions ayant de fortes conséquences sur l’intérêt public, concrètement lorsqu’il s’agit de la protection de l’environnement. L’évolution croissante du droit environnemental et son empiètement sur la protection des investissements a déclenché une série de différends qui ne se limitent plus à mettre en cause des nationalisations ou des violations de contrats - comme auparavant - mais tournent souvent autour de mesures étatiques de politique publique qui impliquent des questions sensibles telles que, inter alia, la gestion de déchets dangereux, l’accès à l’eau potable, l’étalement urbain, la protection de la biodiversité. Par conséquent, le rôle des tribunaux CIRDI et de leurs décisions devient décisif dans le développement du droit des investissements et dans le débat sur la protection des investissements face aux mesures législatives en matière environnementale. Cette étude a pour objet d’analyser la place des considérations environnementales dans les sentences arbitrales CIRDI. Spécifiquement, il s’agit d’étaler les principaux arguments retenus par les tribunaux internationaux, et de dégager les grandes tendances jurisprudentielles en matière d’arbitrage international d’investissements face aux mesures environnementales. / International arbitration is one of the most frequently used methods to resolve disputes related to foreign investment. Several international investment agreements include provisions relating to arbitration under the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes established by the Washington Convention of 1966. Arbitral tribunals are called to resolve disputes concerning the conduct of host States vis-à-vis foreign investors. Their decisions have major consequences on the public interest, specifically when it comes to protecting the environment. The growing development of environmental law and its encroachment on investment protection has triggered a series of disputes that are no longer confined to questions of nationalization or breach of contracts as before, but often revolve around State public policy measures that involve sensitive issues such as, inter alia, hazardous waste management, access to clean water, urban sprawl, protection of biodiversity. The role of ICSID tribunals and their decisions is therefore critical in the development of investment law and the debate on investment protection and environmental regulation. This study aims to analyze the role of environmental considerations in ICSID arbitral awards. Specifically, it seeks to display the main arguments retained by international tribunals and to identify the major trends in international investment arbitration vis-à-vis environmental measures.

Les fonds souverains, véhicules d'investissement créés, financés et contrôlés par leur Etat d'origine, échappent à l'heure actuelle à toute qualification juridique. Leur structure et finalité souveraines, conjuguées à la nature privée de leurs activités, suscitent de nombreux débats au sein de la communauté internationale, d'autant plus que certaines de leurs opérations, dont l'opacité est régulièrement relevée, s'effectuent en dehors de leur territoire. Les percevant à la fois chevaliers blancs au secours d'un marché financier en pleine crise, et menaces à la souveraineté des nations, les Etats récepteurs de leurs investissements semblent adopter une position quelque peu ambigüe à leur égard, laquelle oscille entre libéralisme et retour à un protectionnisme latent. Ces craintes plus ou moins fantasmés dont ils font l'objet sont par ailleurs attisées par la nouvelle réalité qu'ils projettent d'un basculement du pouvoir au détriment des pays occidentaux et de l'essor d'un nouveau capitalisme d'Etat. Il importe dès lors de déterminer si les fonds souverains sont des acteurs économiques comme les autres, susceptibles de bénéficier de la protection offerte aux investisseurs étrangers, ou des représentants de l'Etat dont ils émanent. Cette question, pierre angulaire des problématiques posées par les fonds souverains, n'épuise toutefois pas l'ensemble des controverses soulevées à leur sujet, ces dernières étant particulièrement nombreuses en termes de problèmes juridiques relatifs à l'encadrement juridique qui leur serait applicable. / Sovereign wealth funds, investment vehicles created, funded and controlled by nation states, do not adhere to any clear legal status. Their public ownership and ultimate objectives, together with the private nature of their activities, most of which are confidential and international, have created much debate and controversy within the international community. Considered by many to be white knights of a financial market in crisis, sovereign wealth funds are also seen as a threat to the economic sovereignty of their host countries, which seem to adopt an ambiguous position towards them, varying between liberalism and a return to a latent protectionism. These more or less fantasized fears are exacerbated by the new reality they project: a decline in western influence and the rise of a new state capitalism in the global scene. It is therefore imperative to understand whether sovereign wealth funds are ordinary economic players that should benefit from the protection provided to international investors, or whether they represent the objectives of the nation states from which they emanate. This question is at the heart of the debates ranging around sovereign wealth funds in addition to controversies surrounding other legal aspects regarding the legal regime that would apply to them.

Magister Legum - LLM / The main objective of this paper is to critically analyse the solutions that countries are currently implementing in response to the much-debated issue that the conventional investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) regime limits a host-state's space to make regulations under public policy. Consequently, the paper makes recommendations on viable solutions that countries can implement as solutions to the ISDS problems. In order to conduct the study, this paper uses the solutions to ISDS problems that have been implemented by the Republic of South Africa (RSA) and Australia respectively. The paper also compares the solutions implemented by RSA and Australia with some internationally recognised solutions. Chapters two and three of the paper discuss the backgrounds and also analyse the solutions to ISDS that have been implemented by RSA and Australia respectively. Chapter four contains the main findings and arguments of the paper. It analyses the strengths and weaknesses of the ISDS solutions that have been implemented by RSA and Australia respectively. One of the main findings of the paper is that retaining the conventional ISDS regime is less beneficial to developing and least developed countries and more beneficial to developed countries, largely due to the differing levels of outward investments that are present in these categories of countries. The paper recommends, inter alia, that, unlike developed countries, developing countries and least-developed countries should abrogate the conventional ISDS regime and only retain it in particular circumstances as explained in chapter five. The paper recommends that ISDS should only be utilised where state-state arbitration would unnecessarily politicise an investment dispute. The paper also finds the use of domestic court as undesirable to investment disputes. The paper recommends mediation as a more balanced avenue for resolving investment disputes.

La soutenance de thèse proposée est une soutenance sur travaux qui portent sur des questions de droit comparé des sociétés, de droit européen des sociétés et de l'arbitrage international. Les travaux portant sur le droit des sociétés s'interrogent sur les développements récents en matière de liberté d'établissement des sociétés en Europe suite à la jurisprudence rendue par la Cour européenne de justice et sur l'opération des Limited liability company de droit anglais en Allemagne et des questions de droit international privé que cela soulève. Le travail sur le droit de l'arbitrage s'interroge sur le sort des traités bilatéraux d'investissement conclus entre Etats devenus Etats membres de l'Union européenne face à la politique menée par la Commission Européenne qui vise leur annulation. / The papers submitted for the viva deal with various comparative company law, European company law and international arbitration related issues. The company law papers look at the recent developments in the freedom of establishment of companies in Europe resulting from the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and at the operation of English law limited liability companies in Germany and certain of the private international law questions that arise in that context. The paper on international arbitration discusses the future of bilateral investment treaties concluded between EU member states in light of the European Commission's hostile approach to such treaties aiming at obtaining their annulment.

Submitted by Fernando Mistura (f.mistura@gmail.com) on 2011-10-10T19:43:49Z No. of bitstreams: 1 20111010 - ThesisMistura.pdf: 9859237 bytes, checksum: 549c3f8971cac6c47966b93ec2c8debc (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Gisele Isaura Hannickel (gisele.hannickel@fgv.br) on 2011-10-10T19:48:44Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 20111010 - ThesisMistura.pdf: 9859237 bytes, checksum: 549c3f8971cac6c47966b93ec2c8debc (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Gisele Isaura Hannickel (gisele.hannickel@fgv.br) on 2011-10-10T19:48:59Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 20111010 - ThesisMistura.pdf: 9859237 bytes, checksum: 549c3f8971cac6c47966b93ec2c8debc (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2011-10-11T12:42:21Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 20111010 - ThesisMistura.pdf: 9859237 bytes, checksum: 549c3f8971cac6c47966b93ec2c8debc (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011-10-07 / This dissertation has sought to identify the role of BRIC country governments in the internationalization of their firms. Drawing upon an exploratory comparative analysis of BRIC OFDI trends and policies, it contributes to further an initial understanding of this phenomenon by shedding light on how and why BRIC governments have been promoting their multinationals. For this, it analysed specific OFDI-related policies implemented by BRIC countries as a way of highlighting policy-gaps and the effects of institutional set-ups in the development of internationalized companies. The rapid rise of MNCs from BRIC countries is quite a recent phenomenon. Although they had invested abroad before, only since the early 2000s OFDI by BRIC MNCs has become substantial. BRIC MNCs are becoming major players in many industries, taking-over competitors in both developed and developing countries, and reshaping competition in many industries. In this process, BRIC governments have played an important role. While until the early 1990s, BRIC governments restricted OFDI because of a negative perspective on its effects on home economies (e.g., reduction in investments at home, exports of jobs, and constraints to the balance-of-payments), in the 2000s their perception of OFDI changed. They have become more aware of the importance of OFDI for the competitiveness of their firms and industrial upgrade. While China, and to a lesser extent India, are one step further, having already put in place a comprehensive set of specific OFDI promoting policies, Brazil and Russia have yet to take further steps in order to create an enabling environment for their companies to fully exploit the advantages of global expansion / Esta dissertação procurou identificar o papel dos governos na internacionalização produtiva de empresas dos países BRIC. Por meio de uma análise comparativa do comportamento dos investimentos diretos no exterior (IDE) destes países e dos mecanismos existentes de suporte à internacionalização das empresas, foi possível identificar as diferentes maneiras de envolvimento desses governos na internacionalização produtiva de suas empresas e apontar lacunas de políticas públicas nestes países. Destarte, esta dissertação contribui à compreensão inicial sobre como e por que os governos destes países têm promovido o desenvolvimento de multinacionais. A rápida ascensão das multinacionais dos países BRIC é um fenômeno recente. Apesar de terem investido no exterior anteriormente, apenas a partir do início dos anos 2000 que o IDE de empresas destes países tornou-se significativo. Desde então, as multinacionais dos países BRIC estão se tornando importantes players em diversas indústrias, adquirindo competidores de países desenvolvidos e em desenvolvimento, e redesenhando a concorrência em muitas indústrias globais. Neste processo, os governos dos países BRIC têm desempenhado um papel importante. Até o início dos anos 1990, o IDE era restringido porque era associado a efeitos negativos sobre as economias domésticas (como por exemplo, à redução de investimentos no país de origem, à exportação de empregos, e a problemas na balança de pagamentos). Desde o início dos anos 2000, entretanto, os governos dos países BRIC mudaram de percepção e passaram a adotar políticas favoráveis à internacionalização produtiva de empresas domésticas. Eles perceberam a importância da internacionalização para a manutenção ou expansão da competitividade das empresas domésticas em um mundo globalizado. A China, e em menor grau a Índia, estão um passo adiante, tendo já posto em prática um conjunto de instrumentos específicos que facilitam a internacionalização de suas empresas. O Brasil e a Rússia ainda têm de tomar novas medidas para criar um ambiente propício para que suas empresas possam mais facilmente explorar as vantagens da expansão global.

När en investerare vill investera utomlands finns många risker som måste beräknas, analyseras och hanteras. Utöver olika ekonomiska risker finns politiska risker. En investerare kan, för att hantera dessa politiska risker, välja att investera i en stat med vilken Sverige har ett bilateralt investeringsskyddsavtal. Dessa avtal reglerar både materiellt investeringsskydd, det vill säga hur en investerare ska behandlas, och processuellt skydd, det vill säga möjligheten för en investerare att väcka talan mot staten investeraren investerar i genom ett internationellt skiljeförfarande. Sverige har idag 66 stycken bilaterala investeringsskyddsavtal i kraft, varav tolv stycken är slutna med länder inom EU. Antalet bilaterala investeringsskyddsavtal slutna mellan EU-länder, intra-EU BIT, ökade avsevärt i och med att unionen utvidgades år 2004 och 2007. Sedan dess har avtalens förenlighet med EU-rätten diskuterats i litteraturen, i skiljedomstolar och nyligen även i EU- domstolen i det så kallade Achmea-målet. I uppsatsen kartläggs och analyseras argumenten i diskussionen om relationen mellan intra-EU BIT och EU-rätten. Vidare analyseras vilken del av investeringsskyddet som intra-EU BIT-förespråkare anser vara mest betydelsefull. Från resonemanget och analysen i uppsatsen dras slutsatsen att det är ISDS-systemet, tvistelösningssystemet där en investerare kan väcka talan mot en stat, som kan anses utgöra den mest betydelsefulla delen av investeringsskyddet i intra-EU BIT:en. Därefter analyseras huruvida ett investeringsskydd innehållande ett ISDS-förfarande kan vara förenligt med principen om ömsesidigt erkännande och förtroende. I uppsatsen konstateras att ISDS-förfarandet inte kan vara förenligt denna princip och att problematiken inte kan lösas genom en juridisk debatt utan måste diskuteras på en politiskt hög nivå. / When investing abroad, an investor is faced with many risks that need to be thoroughly analysed in order to be mitigated. Risks are not only financial, but also political. An investor may, to mitigate these risks, choose to invest in states with which Sweden has a bilateral investment treaty, a so called BIT. BIT do not only regulate treatment of the investor and the investment, which is the material investment protection; but also the jurisdictional possibility of the investor to raise charges against the state of in which the investment has taken place in case of violation of investment rights, procedural investment protection. Today, Sweden has 66 BITs in force, out of which twelve are concluded with EU member states, so called intra-EU BIT. The number of intra-EU BITs grew significantly as a result of the enlargement of the union in the year of 2004 and 2007. Since then, the agreements’ compatibility with the EU legislation has been a subject of discussion within literature, investment arbitrations and recently in the European Court of Justice in the Achmea case. This thesis aims to establish and analyse the context of the discussions flourishing the relationship between the intra-EU BITs and the EU legislation. Additionally, the author intends to identify which argumentation regarding investment protection, that by intra-EU BIT praisers is considered to be the most impactful. As a result, the conclusion of the thesis is that it is the ISDS-system, the investor- state dispute settlement, in which an investor can raise charges towards a state, that is the most valuable part of the investment protection given by the intra-EU BITs. Accordingly, it is analysed weather investment protection containing an ISDS-system can be compatible with the principle of mutual trust and recognition. In the thesis it is concluded that the ISDS-system cannot be considered to be compatible with the principle and that this problem should be debated on a high political level and cannot be solved through a legal debate.