Partial utility-driven scheduling for flexible SLA and pricing arbitration in clouds

Cloud SLAs compensate customers with credits when average availability drops below certain levels. This is too inflexible because consumers lose non-measurable amounts of performance being only compensated later, in next charging cycles. We propose to schedule virtual machines (VMs), driven by range-based non-linear reductions of utility, different for classes of users and across different ranges of resource allocations: partial utility. This customer-defined metric, allows providers transferring resources between VMs in meaningful and economically efficient ways. We define a comprehensive cost model incorporating partial utility given by clients to a certain level of degradation, when VMs are allocated in overcommitted environments (Public, Private, Community Clouds). CloudSim was extended to support our scheduling model. Several simulation scenarios with synthetic and real workloads are presented, using datacenters with different dimensions regarding the number of servers and computational capacity. We show the partial utility-driven driven scheduling allows more VMs to be allocated. It brings benefits to providers, regarding revenue and resource utilization, allowing for more revenue per resource allocated and scaling well with the size of datacenters when comparing with an utility-oblivious redistribution of resources. Regarding clients, their workloads’ execution time is also improved, by incorporating an SLA-based redistribution of their VM’s computational power.

The TTIP, ISDS and the shift towards transparency in investor-state arbitration

The negotiations between the EU and the US over the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) have generated a lot of discussion about investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). This discussion provided the inspiration for this thesis, with the TTIP in the background, setting the scene. In this thesis I study the nature of ISDS and the principle of transparency within investor-state arbitration. I aim to determine whether the use of ISDS is restricted to international arbitration and whether ISDS can be considered to constitute a system or regime. Furthermore, I consider whether the introduction of the UNCITRAL Rules on Transparency in Treaty-based Investor-State Arbitration (2014, the UNCITRAL Transparency Rules) changes investor-state arbitration in relation to transparency. To achieve this, I examine ISDS provisions in several different international investment agreements (IIAs) and evaluate the ways in which transparency is incorporated into investment law. Moreover, I compare the provisions on transparency and confidentiality in institutional arbitration rules with the UNCITRAL Transparency Rules. I have formed several conclusions, including that the ISDS provisions may contain methods other than international arbitration and that ISDS does not constitute a system. Furthermore, the UNCITRAL Transparency Rules do change – theoretically, at least – investor-state arbitration to become more transparent. Whether the UNCITRAL Transparency Rules will make investor-state arbitration fully transparent depends on the actions of the contracting state parties when negotiating new IIAs and whether they choose to incorporate the UNCITRAL Transparency Rules in the IIAs already concluded.

Sport-Specific Arbitration in Canada: A Qualitative Investigation of Four Athletes' Perceptions of the Fairness of the Process

This thesis explored Canadian high performance Athletes' perceptions of the fairness of the SDRCC sport-specific arbitral process. Leventhal’s (1980) model of procedural justice judgment was found to be an effective tool for exploring Athletes’ perceptions of the fairness of the process. Five of his six procedural justice antecedents: consistency, bias suppression, accuracy of information, representativeness, and ethicality influenced the Athletes’ perceptions of the fairness of the process. Emergent data also revealed that the Athletes’ perceptions of fairness were also influenced by three contextual factors and an additional antecedent of procedural justice. Efficiency of the process, inherent power imbalance between Athletes and NSOs, and the measurable effect of the process on personal and professional relationships differentiate sport-specific arbitration from most other processes of allocation. The data also indicated that the opportunity to voice one’s case was also an important determinant of the Athletes’ perceptions of the fairness of the process.

Arbitration and Judicial Power under the united States Constitution

Échange, dans le cadre des matinées constitutionnelles organisées par le CRDP, entre Peter Bowman Rutledge, Professeur agrégé à la Faculté de droit de la Catholic Universiy of America et Roderick MacDonald, titulaire de la Chaire F.R. Scott en droit public et constitutionnel à la Faculté de droit de l'Université de McGill. M. MacDonald est également, chercheur associé au CRDP.

Arbitration under the regulations on the guarantee of new residential buildings in Quebec

Dans ma mémoire, j’ai discuté les concepts d’arbitrage comme méthode de résolution d’un litige et par après, je donne un court historique de l’acceptation d’arbitrage au Québec. Le Chapitre I étudie la structure des règlements du R.B.Q., qui est un gendre d’arbitrage obligatoire institutionnelle, et j’inclus les diverses procédures dans ce système d’arbitrage. La sécurité offert par le plan de garantie règle par le R.B.Q. est discuté dans le Chapitre II en autant qu’il est relié avec le system d’arbitrage R.B.Q., y compris la structure du plan et le contenu de la sécurité. Chapitre III parle des recours disponible aux Bénéficiares ainsi que les avantages et désavantages de l’arbitrage sous les Règlements du R.B.Q. Un court étude comparative de quatre autres juridictions est recherché en Chapitre IV, incluant notre voisin, Ontario, les Etats-Unis et on croise dans les juridictions de Royaume Unie et Allemagne. En conclusion, j’établis que notre système d’arbitrage sous le Règlement protéges notre publique plus que d’autres juridictions. Je suggère des améliorations au système, par contre, incluant l’agrandissement du plan de garantie, l’ajout des pouvoirs donnés aux arbitres américains et ensuite d’intègré un système d’arrêt semblable aux Royaumes Unis.

Alternatives to Reparations in International Investment Arbitration– A Debate Between Theory and Practice

An analysis of the alternatives of compensation in relation to international investment disputes is relevant, because a pecuniary award is not always the appropriate remedy to solve disputes arising between investors and States. This is the case because States may be increasingly interested in opting for a different type of compensation. Furthermore, it is still not clear whether arbitral tribunals have recognised alternative types of awarding damages in respect of international investments disputes. This analysis comprises two principal components, the first, is to identify whether or not the tribunals may render an award that not only demands the payment of a sum of money but also considers some other means of compensation. The second, centres on how compliance with these non-pecuniary awards may be demanded. Our approach to these two principal components will always revolve around the idea of respecting the sovereignty of the State, bearing in mind that the execution of an arbitral award, which obliges the State to refrain from or to perform an act in its territory, relies precisely on the sovereignty of the State to execute it. 

The mutual agreement procedure and arbitration of double taxation disputes

It is in the interest of most states to eliminate double taxation (i.e. the payment of the same tax in two jurisdictions) of transnational commercial enterprises. Because such disputes involve, on the one hand, the state imposition of taxes, a right universally asserted by all states, and private entities on the other, taxation disputes between such parties are not, on their face, easily susceptible to arbitration. This article analyzes two dispute settlement procedures-the OECD First Model Tax Convention and a similar EU Convention-with the exclusive focus on disputes relating to the imposition of double taxation. It will look at the ways in which state roles may vary under these procedures from assisting in the negotiation process to taking a part similar to, but with important differences from, diplomatic protection on behalf of an affected enterprise. The article will examine the situations under which the settlement procedure is required and/or available, how the procedures are triggered, the obligations and parts played by the parties, the means by which the disputes are resolved (from negotiations to tribunals) and the limitations of the procedures. Are they “taxpayer friendly”? As a result the reader may draw comparisons between the two procedures. Finally, the article will look at the proposed OECD Arbitration Clause which is intended to be incorporated into Article 25 of the OECD Model Tax Convention as well as how these mechanisms relate and/or conflict with bilateral tax treaties and the GATS.