請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/74762
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 林彩瑜(Tsai-yu Lin) | |
dc.contributor.author | Nattanon Limsakul | en |
dc.contributor.author | 林成 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-17T09:07:08Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2019-12-25 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2019-12-25 | |
dc.date.issued | 2019 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2019-12-11 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Books:
ALATAS, SYED HUSSEIN (1990), CORRUPTION: ITS NATURES, CAUSES AND FUNCTIONS. BORN, GARY B. (2009), INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION. CHENG, BIN (1953), GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF LAW AS APPLIED BY INTERNATIONAL COURTS AND TRIBUNALS. DOLZER, RUDOLF AND CHRISTOPH SCHREUER (2012), PRINCIPLE OF INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW. DUGAN, CHRISTOPHER F., ET AL. (2008), INVESTOR-STATE ARBITRATION. LLAMZON, ALOYSIUS P. (2014), CORRUPTION IN INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT ARBITRATION. LOUGHMAN, BRIAN P. AND RICHARD A. SIBERY (2012), BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION: NAVIGATING THE GLOBAL RISK. MUCHLINSKI, PETER T (2007), MULTINATIONAL ENTERPRISES AND THE LAW. NEWCOMBE, ANDREW PAUL AND PARADELL LLUIS (2009), LAW AND PRACTICE OF INVESTMENT TREATIES. NICHOLLS QC, COLIN, ET AL. (2006), CORRUPTION AND MISUSE OF PUBLIC OFFICIAL. O’CONNOR, JOHN FRANCIS (1991), GOOD FAITH IN INTERNATIONAL LAW. REDFERN, ALAN, ET AL. (2015), REDFERN AND HUNTER ON INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION, 6th ed. SALACUSE, JESWALD W. (2010), THE LAW OF INVESTMENT TREATIES. SORNARAJAH, MUTHUCUMARASWAMY (2010), THE INTERNATIONAL LAW ON FOREIGN INVESTMENT. STEINGRUBER, ANDREA MARCO (2012), CONSENT IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION. Articles & Journals: Abbot, Kenneth W. and Duncan Snidal (2002), Values and Interest: International Legalization in the Fight Against Corruption, 31. JOURNAL OF LEGAL STUDY 141. Banifatemi, Yas (2009), Mapping the Future of Investment Treaty Arbiration as a System of Law, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting, 103 AMERCIAN SOCIETY OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 323. Beale, Kenneth D. and Paolo Esposito (2009), Emergent International Attitudes towards Bribery, Corruption and Money Laundering, 75 JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION 360. Carrington, Paul D. (2009), American law and Transnational corruption: Is There a Need for Lincoln’s Law Abroad?, in THE CIVIL CONSEQUENCES OF CORRUPTION 37 (Olaf Meyer ed.). Cave, Shane (2006), New Zealand Country Report, in GLOBAL CORRUPTION REPORT 210 (Jana Kotalik and Diana Rodriguez eds.). Cremades, Bernardo (2005), Corruption and Investment Arbitration, in GLOBAL REFLECTIONS ON INTERNATIONAL LAW COMMERCE AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION: LIBER AMEICORUM IN HONOR OF ROBERT BRINER 203 (Gerald Aksen et al. eds.). Cremades, Bernardo and David J. A. Cairns (2003), TRANS-NATIONAL PUBLIC POLICY IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRAL DECISION-MAKING: THE CASES OF BRIBERY, MONEY LAUNDERING AND FRAUD IN ARBITRATION, in ARBITRATION: MONEY LAUNDERING, CORRUPTION AND FRAUD 83 (Andrew Berkeley and Kristine Karsten eds.). Drude, Joachim (2018), Fiat iustitia, ne pereat mundus: A Novel Approach to Corruption and Investment Arbitration. 35(6) JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION 665. Heineman, Jr, Ben W. and Fritz Heimann (2006), The Long War Against Corruption, 85(3) FOREIGN AFFAIR 75. Hepburn, Jarrod (2014), In Accordance with Which Host State Laws? Restoring the ‘Defence’ of Investor Illegality in Investment Arbitration, 5 JOURNAL INTERNATIONAL DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 531. Hunter, Martin and Gui Conde E Silva (2003), Transnational Public Policy and its Application in Investment Arbitrations, 4 JOURNAL OF WORLD INVESTMENT 367. Keesdjian, Catherine (2006), Transnational Public Policy, 13 INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL FOR COMMERCIAL CONGRESS SERIES 857. Kenneth D. Beale and Paolo Esposito, Emergent International Attitudes towards Bribery, Corruption and Money Laundering 75 J. INT. ARB. 360, 369 (2009). Knahr, Christina (2008), Investments 'in Accordance with Host State Law”, in INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW IN CONTEXT 27 (August Reinisch & Christina Knahr eds.). Kraft, David (2009), English Private Law and Corruption: Summary and Suggestions on the Development of European Private Law, THE CIVIL CONSEQUENCES OF CORRUPTION 207 (Olaf Meyer ed.). Kreindler, Richard (2010), Corruption in International Investment Arbitration:Jurisdiction and the Unclean Hands Doctrine, in BETWEEN EAST AND WEST: ESSAYS IN HONOUR OF ULF FRANKE 309 (Kaj Hober and et al. eds.). Lamm, Carolyn B. (2010), et al., Fraud and Corruption in International Arbitration,in LIBER AMICORUM BERNARDO CREMADES 699 (Miguel Angel Fernández Ballesteros and David Arias. Las Rozas eds.). Makinwa, Abiola O. (2009), Civil Remedies for International Corruption: The Role of International Arbitration, in THE CIVIL LAW CONSEQUENCES OF CORRUPTION 257 (Olaf Meyer ed.). Mayer, Pierre (2006), Effect of International Public Policy in International Arbitration?in PERVASIVE PROBLEMS IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION 61 (Loukas A. Mistelis and Julian D.M. Lew eds.). Mbiyavanga, Stefan (2017), Combating Corruption through International Investment Treaty Law, 1(2) JOURNAL OF ANTI-CORRUPTION LAW 132. Meshel, Tamar (2013), The Use and Misuse of the Corruption Defence in International Investment Arbitration, 30(3) JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION 268. Mirzayev, Ruslan (2012), International Investment Protection Regime and Criminal Investigations, 29 JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION 71. Mitchell, Andrew (2006), Good Faith in WTO Dispute Settlement, 7 MELBOURNE JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 339. Moloo, Rahim and Alex Khachaturian (2011), The Compliance with the Law Requirement in International Investment Law, 34 FORDHAM INTERNATIONAL LAW JOURNAL 1473. Muchlinski, Peter (2006), Caveat Investor? The Relevance of the Conduct of the Investor under the Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard, 55 (3) INTERNATIONAL AND COMPARATIVE LAW QUARTERLY 527. Odumosu, Ibironke T. (2011), International Investment Arbitration, and Corruption Claims: An Analysis of World Duty Free v. Kenya, 4 LAW AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87. Partasides, Constantine (2010), Proving Corruption in International Arbitration: A Balanced Standard for the Real World, 25(1) ICSID REV-FILJ, 47. Peterson, Luke Eric (2008), Argentina and Siemens Asks Annulment Committee to Suspend Proceedings, 6 INVESTMENT ARBITRATION REPORT 1. Peterson, Luke Eric (2008), Siemens, and its Argentine subsidiary, plead guilty to certain breaches of Foreign Corrupt-Practices Act, 17 INVESTMENT ARBITRATION REPORT 1. Peterson, Luke Eric (2009), Siemens Waives Rights Under Arbitral Award Against Argentina, 14 INVESTMENT ARBITRATION REPORT 1. Posadas, Alejandro (2000), Combating Corruption Under International Law, 10 DUKE JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE AND INTERNATIONAL LAW 345. Raeschke-Kessler, Hilmar & Dorothee Gottwald (2008), Corruption in Foreign Investment: Contracts and Dispute Settlement between Investors, States, and Agents, 9(1) JOURNAL OF WORLD INVESTMENT AND TRADE 5. Raouf, Mohamed Abdel (2009), How Should International Arbitrators Tackle Corruption Issue?, 24, ICSID REVIEW FOREIGN INVESTMENT LAW JOURNAL 116. Rau, Wolfgang (2009), The Council of Europe’s Civil Law Convention on Corruption?, in THE CIVIL CONSEQUENCES OF CORRUPTION 21 (Olaf Meyer ed.). Rose-Ackerman, Susan (1997), The Political Economy of Corruption, in CORRUPTION AND GLOBAL ECONOMY 31 (Kimberly Ann Elliott ed.). Salacuse, Jeswald W. (1985), Towards a New Treaty Framework for Direct Foreign Investment, 50 JOURNAL OF AIR LAW AND COMMERCE 969. Spalding, Andrew Brady (2010), Unwitting Sanctions: Understanding Anti-Bribery Legislation as Economic Sanctions Against Emerging Markets, 62 FLORIDA LAW REVIEW 351. Wilske, Stephan and Martin Raible (2009), The Arbitrator as Guardian of International Public Policy? Should Arbitrators Go Beyond Solving Legal Issues?, in THE FUTURE OF INVESTMENT ARBITRATION 249 (Catherine A. Rogers and Roger P. Alford eds.). Cases: Abaclat and Others v. Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/07/5, Award (December 29, 2016). Azpetrol International Holdings B.V., Azpetrol Group B.V. and Azpetrol Oil Services Group B.V. v. The Republic of Azerbaijan, ICSID Case No. ARB/06/15, Award (September 9, 2009). Desert Line Projects LLC v. Republic of Yemen, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/17, Award (February 6, 2008). EDF (Services) Limited v. Romania, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/13, Award (July 29, 2009). Fraport AG Frankfurt Airport Services Worldwide v. The Republic of the Philippines, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/25, Award (August 16, 2007).Guyana v Suriname, ICGJ 370, Award (September 17, 2007). Inceysa Vallisoletana S.L. v. Republic of El Salvador, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/26, Award (August 2, 2006). LESI, S.p.A. and Astaldi S.p.A. v. People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/3, Decision on Jurisdiction (July 12, 2006). Metal-Tech Ltd. v. Republic of Uzbekistan, ICSID Case No. ARB/10/3, Award (October 4, 2013). Methanex Corporation v. United States of America, UNCITRAL, Final Award of the Tribunal (August 7, 2005). Niko Resources (Bangladesh) Ltd. v. Bangladesh Petroleum Exploration &Production Company Limited (“Bapex”) and Bangladesh Oil Gas and Mineral Corporation (“Petrobangla”), ICSID Case No. ARB/10/18, Decision on Jurisdiction (August19, 2013).Plama Consortium Limited v. Republic of Bulgaria, ICSID Case No. ARB/03/24, Award (August 27, 2008). RSM Production Corporation v. Grenada, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/14, Annulment proceeding, Decision on the Application of RSM Production Corporation for a Preliminary Ruling of 29 October 2009, (December 7, 2009). Rumeli Telekom A.S. and Telsim Mobil Telekomunikasyon Hizmetleri A.S. v. Republic of Kazakhstan, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/16, Award (July 29, 2008). Saba Fakes v. Republic of Turkey, ICSID Case No ARB/07/20, Award (July 14, 2010). Siemens A.G. v. The Argentine Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/02/8, Award (February 6, 2007). The Rompetrol Group N.V. v. Romania, ICSID Case No. ARB/06/3, Award (May 6, 2013). United States v. Siemens Aktiengesellsch-aft or Siemesns A.G., No. 08-CR-367-RJL (December 12, 2008). Waguih Elie George Siag and Clorinda Vecchi v. The Arab Republic of Egypt, ICSID Case No. ARB/05/153, Award, Dissenting Opinion of Professor Francisco Orrego Vicuña (of the Award), (June 1, 2009). Waste Management, Inc v. United Mexican States, ICSID Case No. ARB (AF)/98/2, Dissenting Opinion K. Highet (June 2, 2000). Wena Hotels Ltd. v. Arab Republic of Egypt, ICSID Case No. ARB/98/4, Award (December 8, 2000). World Duty Free Limited Company v. The Republic of Kenya, ICSID Case No. ARB/00/7, Award (October 4, 2006). Yukos Universal Limited (Isle of Man) v. The Russian Federation, UNCITRAL, PCA Case No. AA 227, ICGJ 481 (PCA 2014), Award (July 18, 2014). Reports: ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK AND ORGANIZATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT (2019), GENERAL INFORMATION: SUPPORTING THE FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTION IN ASIA AND THE PACIFIC: THE ANTI-CORRUPTION INITIATIVE. BURKE-WHITE W. (2015), INTER-RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE INVESTMENT LAW AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL LEGAL REGIMES, E 15 TASK FORCE ON INVESTMENT POLICY, THINK PIECE. COMMITTEE ON ICA OF INTERNATIONAL LAW ASSOCIATION (2003), FINAL REPORT ON PUBLIC POLICY AS A BAR TO ENFORCEMENT OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRAL AWARDS. COUNCIL OF EUROPE (1999), EXPLANATORY REPORT TO THE CRIMINAL LAW CONVENTION ON CORRUPTION. HUGUETTE LABELLE (2010), ANTI-CORRUPTION: CHALLENGES AND TRENDS, IN THE UNITED NATIONS GLOBAL COMPACT: ACHIEVEMENTS, TRENDS, AND CHALLENGES. MOLOO, RAHIM (2010), A COMMENT ON CLEAN HAND DOCTRINE IN INTERNATIONAL. ORGANIZATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT (1997), COMMENTARIES ON CONVENTION ON COMBATING BRIBERY OF FOREIGN PUBLIC OFFICIALS IN INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS. LAW ORGANIZATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT (2008), OECD BENCHMARK DEFINITION OF FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT, 4th ed., http://www.oecd.org/daf/inv/investmentstatisticsandanalysis/40193734.pdf. SAWANG BOONCHALERMWIPAS, ET AL. (2003), PREPAREDNESS OF THAILAND FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION AGAINST CORRUPTION. THE UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT (2015), WORLD INVESTMENT REPORT. Treaties: Admission, Protection and Treatment of Investments, Treaty between the Kingdom of Thailand and the Federal Republic of Germany concerning the Encouragement and Reciprocal Protection of Investments, Thailand-Germany, June 6, 2002. Agreement Between Japan and the Lao People’s Democratic Republic for the Liberalization, Promotion and Protection of Investment, Japan-Laos, January 16, 2008. Agreement between the Federal Republic of Germany and the Republic of the Philippines for the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments, Germany-Philippines, July 24, 1998. Agreement between the Government of the State of Israel and the Government of the Republic of Uzbekistan for the Reciprocal Promotion and Protection of Investments, Israel-Uzbekistan, July 4, 1994. Agreement on the Reciprocal Promotion and Protection of Investments, Oman-Yemen, September 20, 1998. Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States, March 16, 1965, 575 U.N.T.S. 159. Council of Europe, Civil Law Convention on Corruption, November 11, 1999. Council of Europe, Criminal Law Convention on Corruption, January 27, 1999. Free Trade Agreement, Canada-Peru, August 1, 2009. Institute of International law’s Resolution, Arbitration between States, State Enterprises, or State Entities and Foreign Enterprise,1989. OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transaction, December 17, 1997. Reciprocal Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement between the Government of the Kingdom of Morocco and the Government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Morocco-Nigeria, December 3, 2016. The African Union, The African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption, July 11, 2003. The Kingdom of Norway Model BIT. The Organization of American States, The Inter-American Convention against Corruption, March 29, 1996. United Nations Convention Against Corruption, UN Doc. A/58/422 (2003). Internet Sources: Anti-Corruption Action Plan for Asia and the Pacific, OECD, http://www.oecd.org/site/adboecdanticorruptioninitiative/anticorruptionactionplanforasiaandthepacific.htm. Arvind Thapliyal and Kunal Kumar, India: Doctrine Of Estoppel:Overview, MONDAQ (September13,2013),http://www.mondaq.com/india/x/262648/landlord+tenant+leases/Doctrine+Of+Estoppel+ Overview. Corruption Information: Why Corruption Occurs, GLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE ANTI-CORRUPTION CTR., http://www.giaccentre.org/why_corruption_occurs.php. (last visited Mar. 1, 2019). History.com, Watergate Scandal, HISTORY.COM, https://www.history.com/topics/1970s/watergate (last updated Sep. 25, 2019). International Bar Association, Paul Volker: Corruption and the rule of law (May 12, 2014),https://www.ibanet.org/Article/NewDetail.aspx?ArticleUid=591e591b-e8d7-4c93-9ab9-da7708da27a0. Leo O’Toole L, Investment Arbitration: A Poor Forum for the International Fight against Corruption, YALE UNIV. BLOG, (Dec. 1, 2016), http://www.yjil.yale.edu/ investment-arbitration-a-poor-forum-for-the-international-fight-against-corrupt ion. Surveys, Corruption Perceptions Index 2017, TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL (Feb. 21, 2018), https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_perceptions_ index_2017 What is corruption, Transparency International, https://www.transparency.org/what-is-corruption. Will Kenton, Estoppel, INVESTOPEDIA (June 25, 2019), https://www.investopedia.com /terms/e/estoppel.asp. Others: Aidt, Toke S. (2010), Corruption and Sustainable Development (Faculty of Economics and Jesus College University of Cambridge, Working Paper No. 1061). General Assembly Resolutions 58/4 (iii), United Nations Convention Against Corruption (October 31, 2003). GUI J. CONDE E SILVA, Transnational Public Policy in International Arbitration (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Queen Mary College, University of London) (on file with author) TAMAR MORCHILADZE, Impact of Investment Wrongdoing on Arbitration Proceedings: How Far Should an Investment Wrongdoing Get? (Nov. 11, 2012) (unpublished thesis, University of Oslo) (on file with University of Oslo Library, University of Oslo) U.S. Department of Justice, Eight Former Senior Executives and Agents of Siemens Charged in Alleged $100 Million Foreign Bribe Scheme, December 13, 2011. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (2005), Dispute Settlement: International Commercial Arbitration, U.N.Doc. A/UNCTAD/EDM /Misc.232 / Add.38. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Scope and Definition: UNCTAD Series on issues in international investment agreements, U.N.Doc. A/UNCTAD/DIAE/IA/2010/2, (2011). Wouters, Jan (2012), et al., The Fight Against Corruption International Law Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies (Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies Working Paper No. 94). | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/74762 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 國際投資仲裁在反貪腐議題中所扮演的角色,逐漸在國際投資法的討論中凸顯其重要性。尤其,國際投資仲裁庭是否有法律權限或義務來處理貪腐議題?若有,其所應適用的相關法律原則及產生的法律效果為何?此等議題都值得吾人從法律的觀點作進一步的探討與分析。
國際投資仲裁的原初制度目的,並非為了打擊國際投資中的貪腐議題。相反的,其是為了在外國投資人與地主國間,提供一個中立客觀的爭端解決機制。藉此,其一方面得減緩投資者在地主國進行投資的相關法律上之疑慮,另方面亦得促進投資者與地主國間之信賴關係。然而,反貪腐政策作為實踐永續發展的一環,實與國際投資仲裁的最終制度目的一致。 基此,本文首先將會探討在國際仲裁法律發展下,仲裁庭於若干案件中,如何處理當事人於仲裁程序中所提出的貪腐議題。再者,本文將討論如何透過國際投資仲裁庭,來處理貪腐議題的可能性。希冀透過本文的研究,能夠提供吾人於思索如何透過國際投資仲裁庭,來權衡反貪腐議題與投資人保護等目的時,一個清晰的法律分析視角。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Concerns have expressed regarding how the international investment arbitral tribunal can combat corruption in foreign investment. In particular, considering the duty of the arbitral tribunal whether the tribunal is obliged to address corruption issues. The issue becomes more apparent in the analysis of the investment tribunal’s role with legal principles and consequences including the limited power of the tribunal’s operation in the combat against corruption.
The main purpose of investment arbitration is to provide an impartial and reliable mechanism for dispute resolution between the foreign investor and the host state. This is an essential tool to reduce the investor’s concern and create confidence for the investor to invest in the host state. Thus, combating corruption is not the priority goal of investment arbitration. However, if considered deeply, it is found that sustainable development is the international investment’s ultimate policy which is consistent with the anti-corruption policy that seeks to eliminate the obstacle deterring sustainable development. This paper will look into arbitral jurisprudence on corruption in many cases where corruption allegations are invoked into the arbitral proceedings. Afterward, this research will discuss combating corruption through international investment arbitration. Balancing between combating Corruption and investor protection will be also revealed. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-17T09:07:08Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-108-R06a21127-1.pdf: 1686227 bytes, checksum: c423d904eda25ef382c143bd7f904893 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2019 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 謝辭 i
摘要 ii Abstract iii Chapter 1: Introduction 1 1.1 The Objective of the Study 1 1.2 The Scope and Limitations of the Study 3 1.3 The Layout of the Thesis 5 Chapter 2: Corruption Issues in Relation to Foreign Investment 7 2.1 An Overview 7 2.2 A Definition of Corruption 8 2.3 The Incentives and Contributing Factors of Corruption 9 2.4 The Corrupt Activities in Foreign Investment 12 2.4.1 The Corrupt Conduct of the Investor 12 2.4.2 The Corrupt Conduct of the Public Official 17 Chapter 3: The International Efforts to Combat Corruption 19 3.1 National and International Anti-Corruption Mechanisms 20 3.1.1 The U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act 20 3.1.2 The OECD Anti-Bribery Convention 22 3.1.3 The Regional Anti-corruption Conventions 25 3.1.4 The United Nations Convention against Corruption 32 3.2 The Effect of Anti-corruption Campaign on the Global Community 34 3.3 The Effort to Deal with Host States’ Public Official in a More Focused Manner 35 3.4 Investment Treaty 36 3.4.1 The Recent Trend of Investment Treaty for Combating Corruption: Anti-corruption Carve-out Clauses 38 3.4.2 The Challenges and Objections to Corruption Carve-out Clauses 41 Chapter 4: The Jurisprudence on Corruption in International Investment Arbitration 43 4.1 Cases Where the Corruption Allegations Were Raised by Host State 44 4.1.1 Wena Hotels Ltd. v. Arab Republic of Egypt (2000) 44 4.1.2 Inceysa Vallisoletana S.L. v. Republic of El Salvador (2006) 47 4.1.3 World Duty Free Limited Company v. The Republic of Kenya (2006) 50 4.1.4 Siemens A.G. v. The Argentine Republic (2007) 55 4.1.5 Fraport AG Frankfurt Airport Services Worldwide v. The Republic of the Philippines (2007) 58 4.1.6 Azpetrol International Holdings B.V., Azpetrol Group B.V. and Azpetrol Oil Services Group B.V. v. The Republic of Azerbaijan (2009) 62 4.1.7 Metal-Tech Ltd. v. The Republic of Uzbekistan (2013) 64 4.2 Cases Where the Corruption Allegations Were Raised by Investor 71 4.2.1 Methanex Corporation v. United States of America (2005) 71 4.2.2 Rumeli Telekom A.S. and Telsim Mobil Telekomunikasyon Hizmetleri A.S. v. Republic of Kazakhstan (2008) 74 4.2.3 EDF (Services) Limited v. Romania (2009) 77 4.2.4 RSM Production Corporation v. Grenada (2009) 80 Chapter 5:The Role of International Investment Arbitration in the Combat against Corruption 84 5.1 The Arbitral Tribunal’s Duty to Combat Corruption 85 5.1.1 The Ethical Duty 85 5.1.2 The Professional Duty 87 5.1.3 The Duty to Render an Enforceable Award 88 5.2 The Role of International Investment Arbitration to Combat Corruption 90 5.2.1 The Legal Principles Supporting the Corruption Allegations 90 5.2.2 Proving Corruption through International Investment Arbitration 103 5.3 The Restriction of the Investment Arbitration Tribunal’s Operation on Combatting Corruption 109 Chapter 6: Balancing the Combat against Corruption and the Investment Protection 111 6.1 The Legal Basis may Excuse Investment Wrongdoing 112 6.1.1 The Principle of Good Faith 112 6.1.2 The Estoppel Principle 115 6.2 The Interpretation of the Legality Clause by the Investment Tribunal 117 6.2.1 The Fundamental Principles is Required in the Legality Clause 118 6.2.2 Only Law Related to Investment is Sufficient for the Legality Clause 119 6.3 Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard as a Cornerstone of the Prevention of the Occurrence of Corruption in Foreign Investment 120 Chapter 7: Conclusion 123 Bibliography 127 | |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.title | 初探國際投資仲裁於貪腐議題中之可能角色 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Exploring a Possible Role of International Investment Arbitration in Corruption Issues | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 108-1 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 陳在方(Tsai-fang Chen),楊培侃(Pei-kan Yang) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 國際投資仲裁,貪腐議題之控訴,國際投資仲裁於反貪腐議題的法律權限, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | International Investment Arbitration,Corruption Allegation,Jurisprudence on Corruption in International Investment Arbitration, | en |
dc.relation.page | 138 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201904370 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2019-12-11 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 法律學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 法律學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 法律學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-108-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 1.65 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。