International conventions signifies international trade, which in itself would be ineffective if there were no dispute settlement mechanisms. This essay intends to examine how dispute settlement mechanisms between states have developed over the years and a large emphasis is placed on the World Trade Organizations (WTO) Dispute Settlement Body since it’s had great significance for the efficiency of international law. In order to show the need for dispute settlement mechanisms, a background to the conventions that have called for the development of the DSB is in order. This essay focuses on Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), and the agreement that currently regulate intellectual property rights, Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), but also its connection to the DSB. The current negotiations between the EU and the USA for a free trade agreement, Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is also mentioned since it intends to serve as a global model once settled. The purpose of this paper is to investigate and analyze the emergence of the TRIPS agreement, and its relation to the dispute settlement mechanism of the WTO.

"Despite the apparent universal existence of the friendly settlement procedure it has not been extensively used in the African regional system. Against this background, this study is a comparative analysis of the provisions and application of the friendly settlement procedure in the African, Inter-American and European regional systems. The study further examines in detail the practice and jurisprudence of the three regional systems on a comparative basis. The comparative analysis is relevant for the following reasons. Both Africa and South America share common historical backgrounds in terms of socio-economic development and the nature of human rights violations. Europe has the oldest human rights system and if experience is anything to go by, then there might be lessons to be learnt by the younger counterparts. The establishment of the African Court of Human and Peoples' Rights (African Court) to complement the protection mandate of the African Commission on Human and Poeoples' Rights (The African Commission) further justifies the comparative analysis as the other regional systems also have regional human rights courts. ... Chapter 1 is an introduction of the study on the effectiveness and propriety of friendly settlements. The ensuing chapter traces the foundations and sets up the conceptual and theoretical framework of friendly settlements. Having established the existence of the procedure, chapter 3 examines the institutional and legal provisions of friendly settlements in international and regional human rights instruments on a factual level. The detailed and critical analysis of the frienldy settlement procedure is presented in chapter 4. The author makes use of the jurisprudence of the three regional human rights bodies and examines how the procedure has been applied in practice. The practice of the three regional bodies is analysed on a comparative basis to assess the effectiveness of the procedure. The last chapter makes conclusions and gives recommendations regarding the application of the friendly settlement procedure as an alternative method of dispute resolution." -- Introduction. / Thesis (LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa)) -- University of Pretoria, 2006. / Prepared under the supervision of Dr. Henry Ojambo, Faculty of Law, University of Makerere, Uganda / http://www.chr.up.ac.za/academic_pro/llm1/dissertations.html / Centre for Human Rights / LLM

The master's work consists of 88 sheets, 78 bibliographic sources are used. The relevance of the research topic of the master's work is due to the fact that recently the use of commercial concession in modern entrepreneurial activity has become more widespread, since the use of a well-known brand, trademark, as well as the application of the developed technologies for the production of certain products, allows one to acquire a number of advantages, as for the copyright holder , and for the user and, of course, for the final consumer of the goods. The purpose of the work is to study the features of a commercial concession agreement as a sales management tool. Tasks: To study the concept of a commercial concession agreement and the sources of civil law that govern it; Consider the legal characteristics of a commercial concession agreement; To analyze the economic essence of a commercial concession; To analyze the global picture of commercial concession; To analyze the features of the ratio of the contract of commercial concession with related contracts; Summary of case law on commercial concession cases; Identify the problems of legal regulation of the contract of commercial concession, and offer them optimal solutions; Give the organizational and economic characteristics of LLC “Magnitiv”; To analyze the legal work in LLC “Magnitiv”; Implement a commercial concession in LLC Magnitiv. The methodological tools of the study consisted of general scientific and private legal methods of cognition, such as synthesis, analysis, abstraction, historical, formal logical, statistical, concrete sociological, structural and functional, and others. The practical significance of the study lies in the fact that the conclusions and provisions formulated in it develop and supplement the notions that have developed in science about commercial activity as a subject of legal regulation and can be useful for further research in the field of commercial concession. The main ideas and conclusions of the study can be useful and used to implement a commercial concession at Magnitiv LLC, as well as to improve the activities of the organization as a whole. The information and empirical basis of the study, providing the reliability, reliability, accuracy of conclusions and assumptions, was served by the methods of studying and analyzing literary sources, the information set forth in monographs and scientific articles, regulatory acts of Russian legislation, the charter and local documents of the enterprise. / Магистерская работа состоит из 88 листа, использовано 78 библиографических источников. Актуальность темы исследования магистерской работы обусловлена тем, что в последнее время все большее распространение получает использование коммерческой концессии в современной предпринимательской деятельности, поскольку использование известной торговой марки, торгового знака, а также применение разработанных технологий производства определенной продукции, позволяет приобрести ряд преимуществ, как для правообладателя, так и для пользователя и, безусловно, для конечного потребителя товара. Цель работы – изучить особенности договора коммерческой концессии как средство управления продажами. Задачи: Изучить понятие договора коммерческой концессии и источники гражданского права, которые его регулируют; Рассмотреть правовую характеристику договора коммерческой концессии; Разобрать экономическую сущность коммерческой концессии; Проанализировать мировую картину коммерческой концессии; Проанализировать особенности соотношения договора коммерческой концессии со смежными договорами; Обобщение судебной практики по делам коммерческой концессии; Выявить проблемы правового регулирования договора коммерческой концессии, и предложить для них оптимальные пути решения; Дать организационно-экономическую характеристику ООО «Магнитив»; Провести анализ договорно-правовой работы в ООО «Магнитив»; Реализовать коммерческую концессию в ООО «Магнитив». Методологический инструментарий исследования составили общенаучные и частноправовые методы познания, такие, как синтез, анализ, абстрагирование, исторический, формально-логический, статистический, конкретно-социологический, структурно-функциональный и другие. Практическая значимость исследования состоит в том, что сформулированные в ней выводы и положения развивают и дополняют сложившиеся в науке представления о коммерческой деятельности как предмете правового регулирования и могут быть полезны для дальнейших исследований в области коммерческой концессии. Основные идеи и выводы исследования могут быть полезны и использованы для реализации коммерческой концессии в ООО «Магнитив», а также в совершенствовании деятельности организации в целом. Информационно-эмпирической базой исследования, обеспечивающей достоверность, надежность, точность выводов и предположений, послужили методы изучения и анализа литературных источников, информация, изложенная в монографиях и научных статьях, нормативные акты российского законодательства, устав и локальные документы предприятия.

L’arbitrage public international est demeuré un domaine exclusif aux États souverains jusqu’à la fin des années 50, alors que sont apparus les traités bilatéraux relatifs aux investissements (TBI). La principale caractéristique de ces TBI est sans conteste le recours direct de l’investisseur étranger en arbitrage international contre des États récalcitrants, une alternative aux tribunaux locaux souvent inefficaces. Plus récemment, en 1998, l’organe d’appel de l’OMC est allé jusqu’à accepter l’opinion d’amicus curiae dans un différend opposant des États et aujourd’hui, l’admission de ce type d’opinion est expressément prévue dans plusieurs TBI de nouvelle génération. Mais si l’investisseur bénéficie d’un recours devant une instance arbitrale neutre, il en va tout autrement pour la population locale qui se trouve souvent lésée par la présence, sur son territoire, d’investisseurs étrangers. Le droit de présenter une opinion ne peut remplacer le droit de faire valoir une réclamation. Se pose donc la question : est-ce que, dans le contexte actuel du droit de l’investissement international, des tiers (par rapport aux parties signataires de TBI et par rapport aux parties au différend) peuvent prétendre à une voie de recours direct en arbitrage international? Nous sommes d’avis qu’une telle voie de recours est actuellement possible et que le contexte de l’arbitrage relatif à l’investissement constitue un terrain fertile pour la mise en place de ce droit, étant donné la place déjà faite aux investisseurs. Nous verrons que les principales objections à l’admission de tiers à l’arbitrage international peuvent être rejetées. L’objection de l’absence du consentement des parties intéressées tombe quand on constate les nombreux cas d’arbitrage international où la portée du consentement a été étendue pour inclure des non-parties ou encore pour soumettre à l’arbitrage des matières non envisagées au départ. Par ailleurs, l’absence de qualité pour agir en droit international est un problème théorique, car les investisseurs y ont déjà accès malgré l’absence de cette qualité. Reste donc à déterminer quelle pourrait être la base d’un recours en droit substantiel international pour qu’un tiers puisse faire valoir une réclamation. Nous verrons qu’il existe des instruments juridiques et des principes internationaux dont la contravention pourrait très bien engager la responsabilité de l’État ou de l’investisseur fautif, tout comme il est possible de bien circonscrire les critères d’admissibilité des tiers à la procédure d’arbitrage international. / International arbitration has remained an exclusive domain sovereign states until, in the late 50s, came the first bilateral investment treaties (BITs). The main feature of these BITs is undoubtedly the right, granted to investors, to direct international arbitration against recalcitrant States, an alternative to often ineffective local justice. More recently, in 1998, the appellate body of the WTO went to accept the opinion of an independent amicus curiae in a dispute between State members. Today, the admission of such opinions is clearly provided for in several recent BITs. But if investors benefit from a right of action before a neutral international arbitration body, the situation is quite different for the local population, who is often affected by the presence of foreign investors on its territory. The right to submit an opinion cannot replace the right to legal action. This therefore raises one question: in the current context of international investment law, is it possible for third parties (non signatories of BITs and not parties to the dispute) are entitled to a remedy direct international arbitration? We are of the opinion that the answer to this question is: yes. And the context of investment arbitration, because of the right to direct arbitration against States already granted to investors, constitutes a fertile ground for the implementation of this right of action in favour of third parties. The objection based on the absence of the parties’ consent to such right of action has been set aside in many international arbitration cases where the scope of consent has been extended to include non-parties or to submit to arbitration matters not contemplated at first. Also, the objection based on the absence of legal standing of third parties in International Law proves to be theoretical as foreign investors already have access to international justice despite the lack of this quality. There remains to determine what substantial International Law will constitute a valid legal basis for a third party claim. We will see that there exists legal instruments and international principles and that their violation by States or investors may result in the obligation to compensate the prejudice suffered, as well as it is possible to clearly define and indentify who the third parties could be.

L’arbitrage public international est demeuré un domaine exclusif aux États souverains jusqu’à la fin des années 50, alors que sont apparus les traités bilatéraux relatifs aux investissements (TBI). La principale caractéristique de ces TBI est sans conteste le recours direct de l’investisseur étranger en arbitrage international contre des États récalcitrants, une alternative aux tribunaux locaux souvent inefficaces. Plus récemment, en 1998, l’organe d’appel de l’OMC est allé jusqu’à accepter l’opinion d’amicus curiae dans un différend opposant des États et aujourd’hui, l’admission de ce type d’opinion est expressément prévue dans plusieurs TBI de nouvelle génération. Mais si l’investisseur bénéficie d’un recours devant une instance arbitrale neutre, il en va tout autrement pour la population locale qui se trouve souvent lésée par la présence, sur son territoire, d’investisseurs étrangers. Le droit de présenter une opinion ne peut remplacer le droit de faire valoir une réclamation. Se pose donc la question : est-ce que, dans le contexte actuel du droit de l’investissement international, des tiers (par rapport aux parties signataires de TBI et par rapport aux parties au différend) peuvent prétendre à une voie de recours direct en arbitrage international? Nous sommes d’avis qu’une telle voie de recours est actuellement possible et que le contexte de l’arbitrage relatif à l’investissement constitue un terrain fertile pour la mise en place de ce droit, étant donné la place déjà faite aux investisseurs. Nous verrons que les principales objections à l’admission de tiers à l’arbitrage international peuvent être rejetées. L’objection de l’absence du consentement des parties intéressées tombe quand on constate les nombreux cas d’arbitrage international où la portée du consentement a été étendue pour inclure des non-parties ou encore pour soumettre à l’arbitrage des matières non envisagées au départ. Par ailleurs, l’absence de qualité pour agir en droit international est un problème théorique, car les investisseurs y ont déjà accès malgré l’absence de cette qualité. Reste donc à déterminer quelle pourrait être la base d’un recours en droit substantiel international pour qu’un tiers puisse faire valoir une réclamation. Nous verrons qu’il existe des instruments juridiques et des principes internationaux dont la contravention pourrait très bien engager la responsabilité de l’État ou de l’investisseur fautif, tout comme il est possible de bien circonscrire les critères d’admissibilité des tiers à la procédure d’arbitrage international. / International arbitration has remained an exclusive domain sovereign states until, in the late 50s, came the first bilateral investment treaties (BITs). The main feature of these BITs is undoubtedly the right, granted to investors, to direct international arbitration against recalcitrant States, an alternative to often ineffective local justice. More recently, in 1998, the appellate body of the WTO went to accept the opinion of an independent amicus curiae in a dispute between State members. Today, the admission of such opinions is clearly provided for in several recent BITs. But if investors benefit from a right of action before a neutral international arbitration body, the situation is quite different for the local population, who is often affected by the presence of foreign investors on its territory. The right to submit an opinion cannot replace the right to legal action. This therefore raises one question: in the current context of international investment law, is it possible for third parties (non signatories of BITs and not parties to the dispute) are entitled to a remedy direct international arbitration? We are of the opinion that the answer to this question is: yes. And the context of investment arbitration, because of the right to direct arbitration against States already granted to investors, constitutes a fertile ground for the implementation of this right of action in favour of third parties. The objection based on the absence of the parties’ consent to such right of action has been set aside in many international arbitration cases where the scope of consent has been extended to include non-parties or to submit to arbitration matters not contemplated at first. Also, the objection based on the absence of legal standing of third parties in International Law proves to be theoretical as foreign investors already have access to international justice despite the lack of this quality. There remains to determine what substantial International Law will constitute a valid legal basis for a third party claim. We will see that there exists legal instruments and international principles and that their violation by States or investors may result in the obligation to compensate the prejudice suffered, as well as it is possible to clearly define and indentify who the third parties could be.