As the government of Saudi Arabia begins a major evolutionary process of economic expansion, the Saudi stock market has become the focus of increased attention. The legal framework that regulates the stock market is still considered to be underdeveloped, as only recently, in 2003, did the Saudi legislator issue a Capital Market Law (2003) and create a regulatory body vested with its enforcement. The securities market was built around this legislation, which helped to stimulate the economy by attracting investor. However, the Saudi stock market experienced a big crash in February 2006, which had a profound impact in heavy losses for large and small investors. The practical application of these new laws brought to light some shortcomings in the regulations of the stock market, and specifically, the need for the legal protection of investor. Hence, the overarching aim of this thesis is to focus particular on four issues: on the question of whether or not the existing regulations of the Saudi stock market adequately protects investor from poor disclosure, insider trading and market manipulation induced partly by market brokers. Thus, there are four primary objectives of this thesis: to enhance the effectiveness of existing rules to secure a suitable level of protection for investor against poor disclosure, market abuse and illegal practices by broker; to increase investor confidence and attractiveness of the market; to prevent a future repeat of the stock market collapse and avoid the steps that caused it; and finally, to provide useful material for Saudi Capital Market Law (2003) reforms in the future. In order to examine these sensitive issues, the thesis will first examine whether or not the disclosure regulations of the Saudi stock market provide adequate protection to investor and secondly assess the effectiveness of the legal framework of insider trading regulations for preventing insider trading. Third, it will ascertain how well the the law defines market manipulation and covers the most common forms of market manipulation under Saudi securities law. Lastly it will explore the responsibility that brokers in the Saudi stock market have to achieve the greatest degree of protection for investor.

This thesis studies the role of derivative claims in the English legal system in the context of protecting the company as a separate legal personality, through both the shareholders and employees acting as the derivative claim applicants. In spite of the aim of the English Law Commission to change the derivative claim to a more affordable and more accessible mechanism in the UK, still the current overly restricted approach to this mechanism prevents it to play an effective role in protecting the company. The academic literature brings several factors including the availability of other mechanisms of protection for shareholders, the cost of the derivative claim and the ambiguities in the procedural requirements as the reasons for the ineffectiveness of the derivative claim. This research argues that the derivative claim is the only direct mechanism of protection for the company as a separate legal personality, and that protection of the company extends beyond the protection of its shareholders. Therefore, the hurdles in the way of efficiency of the derivative claim should be removed and it should become a more effective mechanism of protection for the company as a whole. Although the combination of other mechanisms of accountability for directors1 could discipline directors and provide an environment, in which the derivative claim is less needed, however, they have been designed to protect the personal interests of shareholders in the first instance and might not provide a potent protection for the company in all circumstances. This thesis argues that the derivative claim could work as a complementary mechanism and provide protection for the company in situations that the other mechanisms fail to do so. In order to enhance the protection of the company through the derivative claim, the thesis proposes that the scope of derivative claims’ applicants should be extended to employees. Employees have strong incentive to protect the company because they often invest in a company with their human capital, and are deeply dependent on the company well-being for their livelihoods and their pension benefits. In order to make the derivative claim a more affordable and accessible mechanism, the thesis proposes some reforms to derivative claim procedural requirements, including the shareholders ratification and the derivative claim costs. This thesis is a comparative study. The proposals for the derivative claim procedural requirements have been inspired by the derivative claim structures in the United States and New Zealand. The financial structure of the derivative claim in both countries has reduced the risk of the derivative claim for shareholders. Moreover, studying the role of the derivative claim in these jurisdictions confirms the thesis argument that although the availability of the other mechanisms of accountability could affect the need for the derivative claim, still the derivative claim has a role to play as a complementary mechanism.

The thesis seeks to examine the competitiveness of the methods by which beer has been distributed in the UK, particularly the beer tying agreement, with the objective of setting out recommendations for the future. In order to fulfil this objective, the thesis aims firstly to engage in a scholarly exercise of clarifying the role and purpose of the beer tie; the application of the EU competition law provisions to the brewing industry; and the UK Government’s approach to regulating it. Secondly, the thesis engages in comparative research and will consider how other non-UK markets have dealt with the distribution of beer, and more specifically the issue of the beer tie. In doing so, the thesis seeks to ascertain how competitive the UK market is in the context of these other geographical markets. The thesis will also compare the UK beer market with another UK market in which the use of tying agreements is prevalent in order to ascertain whether the same issues have been faced in this market as in the beer market. The intention of the comparative research in the thesis is to provide assistance to legal policy makers on the future regulation of beer distribution in the UK. The thesis does not however undertake to propose measures to achieve a state of perfect competition. Rather, it undertakes, as the third aim of the thesis, to propose informed recommendations that address better the ongoing anti-competitive concerns associated with the operation of the beer tie today and ensure a socially acceptable level of workable competition.

In 2002, private broadcasters started their own TV transmissions after the creation of the Pakistan Electronic Media Authority. This thesis seeks to identify the challenges to the Pakistan public and private electronic media sectors in terms of enforcement. Despite its importance and growth, there is a lack of research on the enforcement and regulatory supervision of the electronic media sector in Pakistan. This study examines the sector and identifies the action required to improve the current situation. To this end, it focuses on five aspects: (i) Institutional arrangements: institutions play a key role in regulating the system properly. (ii) Legislative and regulatory arrangements: legislation enables the electronic media system to run smoothly. It needs some more improvement as proposed in the thesis. (iii) International efforts: these efforts are very positive to enforce the broadcasting regulation at international level. It will also have a gradual effect on the national market. (iv) Current enforcement challenges: some current media enforcement issues are analysed for the first time in this thesis. (v) Regulatory Reforms: after the development of the technology, the broadcasting sector is now facing some significant regulation issues. These five aspects are examined in Chapters 2 to 4 respectively. These three chapters constitute the main part of the thesis.

This thesis assesses the new ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement (ACIA) in the light of international practice. Investment protection is at the heart of this investment regime. Considering the ACIA as a tool of regional integration, its structure and contents demonstrate its ultimate objective of attracting intra-ASEAN investment flows for the realisation of a single market and production base under the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC). Analysis focuses on the specific elements of the ACIA and how they balance two contradictory interests, i.e. the protection of ASEAN investors and the sovereignty of ASEAN Member States to regulate investments in their territory. Tracking the solutions and innovations of substantial and procedural provisions introduced by the ACIA, it is found that the “ASEAN Way” of consensus and flexibility remains, even though ASEAN has become the AEC with rules and institutions. This general ASEAN Way is specifically reflected in the “ASEAN Way of Investment Protection”. Given the ASEAN-specific context, the ACIA shows a unique balance of States’ and investors’ interests which differs from that of international investment agreements of other regional integration initiatives. While the ACIA aims to protect ASEAN investors, it attempts to respect the sovereignty of ASEAN Member States, by giving more policy space to regulate for public purposes. From these findings, recommendations are offered to improve the ASEAN investment regime. The understanding of the “ASEAN Way of investment protection” may help interpretation and application of investment protection standards of the ACIA, as well as the other existing investment agreements. The ACIA may also serve as a platform for negotiations of future ASEAN investment agreements.

‘Climate change inundation’ — the process whereby climate change-related harms such as rising sea levels, higher storm surges and changing rainfall patterns interact with existing vulnerabilities like poverty, resource scarcity and inadequate infrastructure — will eventually leave low-lying coral atoll island states uninhabitable. Climate change inundation demands our attention because of the unique challenge it presents to the state, which provides the international legal personality and political infrastructure through which individual and collective human rights are protected, treaties are negotiated and so on. While recognising the positive features of proposals for the planned migration of individual islanders, this thesis is concerned with what they fail to capture: the threat posed by climate change inundation to the collective autonomy and independence of atoll island populations. It explores this threat from the perspective of self-determination, a legal principle whose relevance in this context has been widely acknowledged but not yet explored in detail. The thesis identifies the populations of atoll island states as self-determining peoples, argues for the recognition of climate change inundation as a grave, foreseeable, external threat to their self-determination, and examines the reasons other states may have for acting (or not acting) to address this threat. It then proposes a collective decision-making framework for atoll island peoples, drawing inspiration from the Declaration on Friendly Relations. The first option in this decision-making framework is the ‘[re-]establishment of a sovereign and independent State’ with jurisdiction over a defined territory; the second is ‘the emergence into any other political status freely determined by a people’, including a so-called ‘deterritorialized state’; and the third is to enter into ‘free association or integration with an independent State’, a choice that would protect the collective political status of a people but abandon any claim to statehood or exclusive territorial jurisdiction.

This thesis explores the issue of hunger in the context of climate change. In particular, it investigates the role that international law plays in finding ways to tackle hunger. The research focuses on one particular adaptation strategy to climate change that has been proposed, namely ‘climate-ready seeds’. Climate-ready seeds are genetically engineered for resistance to abiotic stresses, such as drought, and intended to increase food production in the face of climate change. This research presents narratives of climate-ready seeds that expose different perspectives on whether these seeds can contribute to solving the problem of hunger. The specific example of climate-ready seeds is seen as a reflection of the ‘neoliberal’ food regime. While the exploration of the role of international law focuses primarily on climate-ready seeds, the conclusions are also relevant for food regime theory more broadly. I study the role of law in discourse on climate-ready seeds through the fields of climate change adaptation law, intellectual property law (particularly seed patents), and human rights law (especially the right to food). My main argument is that, while law is often invoked as part of the solution to climate change-induced hunger, there is little attention for the role that law plays in framing the problem. How hunger is framed as a problem determines the solutions available to solve it. Ultimately, this inquiry investigates the contribution of international law in framing hunger in the context of climate change as a problem. The analysis is based on the identification of five fundamental assumptions underlying debates on climate-ready seeds. I argue that a great deal of critical attention is directed at corporate patent rights on seeds; much less consideration is given to fundamental questions about hunger and how to eradicate it Finally, I apply the conclusions about the role of law in debates about climate-ready seeds to the neoliberal food regime. My broader argument is that global food relations as understood through food regime theory must consider the role that law plays in creating and reinforcing a certain way of thinking about hunger in the context of climate change. Without addressing the framework of assumptions on which the current food regime is based, it will be difficult to truly change global food relations and formulate alternative ways of combating hunger.

The topic “Intellectual Property Rights Infringement on the Internet: An Analysis of the Private International Law Implications” has become increasingly important as the Internet has revolutionized the traditional understanding of the rules of private international law which govern the determination of jurisdiction in the case of intellectual property rights infringement over the Internet. The private international law of intellectual property has until recently been both straightforward and based on traditions, geographical boundaries and physical space. However, the ubiquitous nature of the Internet has brought new challenges in the area of the private international law of intellectual property, which lawmakers, judges and lawyers have to deal with. In particular, the private international law of intellectual property needs somehow address the fact that many of the actions and effects of intellectual property rights infringement within the territory of a particular Member State will not actually have physically taken place there. For example, material protected by intellectual property law can be uploaded in one state, downloaded in another, and viewed in a large number of other states. This means that the intellectual property rights infringers and the owners of intellectual property rights are often miles apart, while the infringers might never have set foot in the country or region where the harm occurs. Moreover, damage is typically suffered in multiple states simultaneously. Therefore, the question of which national authorities have jurisdiction over matters theoretically located in cyberspace is the first point of interest for every intellectual property rights owner whose rights are infringed over the Internet. Thus, the main aim of this work is to identify the problems and provide jurisdictional solutions with regard to the application of the existing jurisdictional rules according to the Council Regulation 1215/2012 on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters in the case of intellectual property rights infringement over the Internet. For without clear and effective jurisdictional rules of intellectual property rights infringement over the Internet, the internal market cannot function properly.

The term “the public interest” is oft-cited but seldom defined. It is in essence both an umbrella term and a short-hand for a concept (or concepts) that we know we need to understand but have difficulty explaining. However, given both the prevalence and the importance of the concept to the law in specific disputes, confronting its essential nature becomes imperative to resolving those clashes. One such instance comes in the form of the conflict of privacy and a free press. One of the foremost legal problems of our time, the clash of Article 8 and Article 10 rights does not lend itself to simple resolutions given the frequency of what might be described as ‘intractable’ or ‘zero-sum’ cases – where both rights cannot be simultaneously realised to the satisfaction of the parties involved. This thesis therefore seeks to understand where the elusive ‘public interest’ lies in such cases. To do so it firstly examines where the public interest is located in each of the respective rights, and then how those rights are to be balanced. This thesis contends that it is not enough simply to understand the nature of the two rights which are being balanced, but that it is crucial to understand how the act of balancing itself impacts upon the outcome. All of this cannot be divorced from the wider social and political context in which the contest between conflicting rights takes place. This thesis therefore systematically examines each of these pieces of the puzzle to garner an in depth understanding of them individually and how they react with each other. This is done in order to produce a set tools – definitions, understandings, and conclusions – which can be applied to factual situations in order to illuminate the location of the public interest in conflicts between privacy and a free press.

This thesis, inquiring into the permissibility of long-term incarceration, maintains that two sets of reasons determine the moral limits of punishment. First, the reasons that justify the infliction of penal harm will only license "proportionate" or "parsimonious" means of realizing our penal aims. Part I, searching for these reasons, conceives of the criminal law as a system of protections, upon which all citizens rely for their assured liberty. An offender weakens this system by contributing to the threat of "criminality." The state is thereby entitled, and only entitled, to harm him as a means of "erasing" his criminality contributions, generally by deterring would-be future offenders. This precludes long-term incarceration in most, but not all cases, given the tenuous relationship between penal severity and deterrence. The second set of reasons opposes degrading punishments. Is long-term incarceration impermissibly degrading, irrespective of its proportionality or usefulness otherwise? Part II gains traction by considering torture, the exemplar of degrading treatment. I define torture as the intentional infliction of a suffusive panic. I argue that it is egregiously "disrespectful" of the human capacity to realize value. It converts a diachronic being capable of building a good life through time into a synchronic being whose awareness is restricted to a maximally terrible present. Meanwhile, a prison sentence is "long-term," I argue, if it severely risks ruining an inmate's life, just in virtue of the amount of time that he is separated from society and thereby deprived of certain associational goods (e.g. a family and career). Long-term incarceration for reasons of retribution or deterrence intentionally inflicts this life-ruining harm. It is thus impermissibly disrespectful of a person's value-generating capacities, I conclude, akin to penal torture. Long-term incarceration for the reason of incapacitation, however, whereby the state is not motivated to harm the offender, can be legitimate.