The analysis of non-discrimination under Article III of GATT has shown weakness or flaws throughout more than fifty years. The language used by GATT/WTO panels and the Appellate Body in interpreting the two prongs of non-discrimination in the national treatment clause, namely, likeness and protection, lagged behind economic reality. The critical legal analysis carried out in here reveals, to some extent, this while offering a clearer and sounder analysis to non-discrimination based more on market analysis and its economic indicators.

No description available.

The minimalist state of the national treatment provision in the investment treaties has provided limited guidance for the tribunals for interpretation. As a result, there were inconsistencies in the interpretation of national treatment, in particular the question of likeness. This thesis aims to develop the doctrinal understanding of the determination of appropriate comparator guided by the underlying philosophies, historical evolution and relevant investment decisions. The methods applied in this thesis are doctrinal and comparative studies of international investment law and the compared jurisprudences. A major part of this thesis is dedicated to examine the comparison and relevance of the GATT/WTO, EU and international human rights law in the interpretation of discrimination based on nationality. The interpretative methods applied by the respective jurisprudences in determining likeness and related questions of legitimate regulatory measures are examined to see whether there are lessons that could be learnt in the interpretation of national treatment in investment law. The finding of this thesis confirms that there is potentially a range of insightful guidance from the jurisprudences under comparison which could provide a structured understanding of national treatment in international investment law. The observations put forth highlight the underlying philosophies and values of the national treatment principle in protecting the investors and addressing the host states’ regulatory needs. It reflects the contemporaneous development in international investment law and provides a positive response to public administrative principles benefited by way of international comparative administration law.

Migrant workers' inequality generates many social issues like Why Migrant workers' children spend more tuition in cities than urban workers' ones since they are all Chinese? As workers in cities shared with the same workload and hours, why migrant workers can only obtain low wages, less job offers and exclusion from social security? In the circumstance of financial crisis, why migrant workers are the first to be unemployed? These long-standing issues always cause social concern and accordingly become motives for the study. The article not only describes migrant workers' livelihood, but also aims at the comparative study between them and urban workers. The finding demonstrated migrant workers are relatively weak upon wages, employment opportunity, their children 's education level and social welfare. Such unfair treatment could be attributed to migrant workers' identity problems¡Bhighly variable labor market and incomplete policy implementation. China 's economy and related policy changes yearly since its reform and opening-up policy, however, they are not fully consider migrant workers factor. Besides, limited with its self-interest, local government's policy implementation shows discrepancy from central counterpart's intention. With vicious circle potential which might affect society in many aspects, government should focus on migrant workers' unfair treatment improvement. The research finding could benefit reader's comprehensive understanding upon migrant workers' core issues. Furthermore, China government's solution could be meaningful references for the improvement of Taiwanese business's migrant workers treatment and Taiwan government's foreign-labor policy.

Many resource-rich countries have adopted domestic policies such as local content policies (LCPs) to make sure that their nationals profit from their resources and to ensure economic development for their countries. However Despite the value that LCPs bring into the local economy, they might be in conflict with international investment agreements. The study will look at what local content entails and what international investment agreements entail. The study will look into the possible areas of conflict such as employment requirements, support schemes and local procurement and determine whether such measures are in conflict with international investment agreements. The findings of the study outline that local content policies are in breach with international investment agreements such as the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, the Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures. / Mini Dissertation (LLM)--University of Pretoria, 2019. / Public Law / LLM / Unrestricted

No description available.

This dissertation analyses the implications of international investment law on host states’ legal ability to protect the environment, regulate sustainable use of natural resources, and develop new approaches to manage environmental risks and uncertainties. ‘Environmental policy space’ is found to be a useful term when exploring the regulatory autonomy in this context. On one hand, investment law aims to ensure stability of the investment environment. On the other hand, environmental law needs flexibility to react to the degradation of the environment. It is found that those different aims do not have to be in conflict. There are useful mechanisms in national environmental law which provide for accessible, transparent and predictable decisions for the private actor. These mechanisms can fulfill the aim of stability in investment law. It is, however, concluded that core provisions of international investment treaties risk to put constraints to environmental law in a variety of ways. To diminish these risks, states, when concluding investment treaties, should make clear that constraining environmental regulation is not compatible with the overarching aim of sustainable development. Furthermore, the interpretation of provisions of investment protection must respect principles and instruments of environmental law not to continue being unbalanced towards investor interests. It is also concluded that allowing for investor – state arbitration, without the investor exhausting local remedies, will ignore the important national administrative review system of public environmental measures.

Regulation of border and behind-the-border measures in the oil and gas sectors presents the ‘resource access’ challenge with immense economic ramifications for export markets, yet their status under the multilateral trading regime remains obscure. Recent developments that could reshape the trading regime and market dynamics for oil and gas have seen the call for a global energy governance gain momentum in recent years. But the complex relationships between national laws, institutional norms, and the multilateral trading regime regulating energy presents an ideological ‘conflict in applicable law’. They reveal a conflict between regulatory privileges enshrined in energy resource-focused institutions namely: OPEC as a producer-only treaty, the ECT as a sector-specific multilateral energy treaty, national energy laws on the heel of the PSNR principle as a customary international law; versus international obligations under the GATT rules relevant to energy. These regimes have the trappings of nationalism, regionalism, and institutionalism in energy regulation, thereby creating an ambiguous path to global energy governance. This research revisits the institutional and regulatory architecture of oil and gas regimes from the perspective of quota measures and trade-related investment measures (TRIMs) implemented through the instrumentality of national laws, acts of NOCs (in the oil sector) and acts of non-state undertakings (in the gas sector). It therefore charts an uncommon territory and brings a new dimension to the discipline of energy and trade, with a robust examination of how regulation of quota measures and trade-related investment in the oil sector (with export restriction issues) differs from their regulation in the gas sector (with underlying competition issues) and how their varying trade effects shape their future in international economic law. Given the inherent conflicts between the legal, policy, and regulatory design of these regimes governing energy, this research first explores and applies the principle of conflict of norms to energy governance. This paves way for a hands-on approach to examining the applications of these measures under the auspices of these regimes aimed at a ‘co-operative energy governance’ between the resource-focused regimes and the GATT rules relevant to energy on the basis of their trade effects. I argue that an understanding of ‘quota measures’ and ‘TRIMs’ in the oil sector compared to their implementations in the gas sector is compelling in making a case for a systemic energy cooperation that would serve economic interests of all affected states without diminishing the normative value of each regime in each sector.

No description available.

No description available.