936 resultados para Tordesillas Treaty
Resumo:
Marine genetic resources other than fish and mammals are of increasing commercial interest and importance in genetic engineering, but fail being properly addressed in the law of the sea and in international economic law. The paper analyses the implication of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the Convention on Biodiversity, the WTO Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights and related instruments under the auspices of WIPO. The paper argues that the triangle of these agreements does not adequately address marine genetic resources in particular in the high seas. Neither concerns of protecting biodiversity nor of access and benefit sharing find appropriate answers commensurate to the commercial potential of marine genetic resources. The paper suggests developing an instrument inspired by, and comparable to, the mechanisms developed by the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. The instrument would grant facilitated access to marine genetic resources and offer a more detailed set of rules with respect to the sharing of benefits resulting from their use, thereby addressing the existing legal gaps in a comprehensive way.
Resumo:
by Lucien Wolf
Resumo:
Historically, the authority to conclude international treaties was exclusively exercised by administrative bodies (or the chief of state). However, recent studies pointed out that the present legislative bodies have come to play a more active role through ratification or the review of treaties in European and American countries. Harrington (2005) studied judicial reform in British dominions and criticized the past executive-dominant treaty-making process as a “democratic deficit” due to a fear that under this system the nation might be bound by international agreements for which a consensus had not been obtained. These studies indicated that people’s participation in the treaty-making process has increased on a global basis, but neither of them provides sufficient descriptive evidence regarding why and how such procedures were established. The present paper therefore attempts to solve these questions by analyzing the legislative and political process of the treaty-making procedure reform in Thailand’s 2007 constitution as a case study.
Resumo:
El baño de Doña Leonor de Guzmán en el palacio de Tordesillas
Resumo:
Inclui notas explicativas e bibliográficas.
Resumo:
Variação de título na Revista Nacional de Direito e Jurisprudência: O poder de celebrar tratados ("treaty-making power") na Constituição brasileira de 1988
Resumo:
Opinions concerning the 7th article of the treaty.
Resumo:
[Introduction.] This paper discusses the uncertain future of Member State BITs with third countries in the light of the developing EU investment policy. The question will be examined on the basis of the proposed Regulation establishing transitional arrangements for bilateral investment agreements between Member States and third countries presented by the Commission on 7 July 20101 and the European Parliament’s Position adopted at first reading on 10 May 2011.2 The proposed Regulation and the Commission Communication of the same day are meant to be the “first steps in the development of an EU international investment policy”.3 The first chapters present the legal framework relevant for this question and its evolution to better understand the particular challenges of this transition process. The second chapter examines the relationship of EU law and investment law, with a brief introduction of the notion of investment law and the scope of the EU’s new investment competence. The third chapter outlines the legal framework for the continuation and termination of treaties under international and EU law. The fourth chapter concerns BITs, first covering the particular nature of BITs and then the CJEU’s judgments in the BIT Cases of 2009. The fifth chapter consists of a step by step analysis of the different provisions of the proposed Regulation.
Resumo:
[From the Introduction]. The economic rules, or put more ambitiously, the economic constitution of the Treaty,1 only apply to economic activities. This general principle remains valid, even if some authors strive to demonstrate that certain Treaty rules also apply in the absence of an economic activity,2 and despite the fact that non-economic (horizontal) Treaty provisions (e.g. principle of nondiscrimination, rules on citizenship) are also applicable in the absence of any economic activity.3 Indeed, the exercise of some economic activity transcends the concepts of ‘goods’ (having positive or negative market value),4 workers (even if admitted in an extensive manner),5 and services (offered for remuneration).6 It is also economic activity or ‘the activity of offering goods and services into the market’7 that characterises an ‘undertaking’ thus making the competition rules applicable. Further, it is for regulating economic activity that Article 115 TFEU, Article 106(3) TFEU and most other legal bases in the TFEU provide harmonisation powers in favour of the EU. Last but not least, Article 14 TFEU on the distinction between services of general economic interest (SGEIs) and non-economic services of general interest (NESGIs), as well as Protocol n. 26 on Services of General Interest (SGIs) confirm the constitutional significance of the distinction between economic and non-economic: a means of dividing competences between the EU and the member states. The distinction between economic and non-economic activities is fraught with legal and technical intricacies – the latter being generated by dynamic technological advances and regulatory experimentation. More importantly, however, the distinction is overcharged with political and ideological significations and misunderstandings and, even, terminological confusions.8