163 research outputs found

    Should Investment Treaties Contain Public Policy Exceptions?

    Get PDF
    The increasing inclusion of exceptions in newly concluded investment treaties, together with the divergent manner in which tribunals and annulment committees have approached these provisions, suggests that a greater understanding of their role and purpose is needed. In particular, the question whether exceptions operate as permissions or as defenses is a crucial but unaddressed issue that has significant implications for both litigation and practice and, in turn, implications for the stability of the regime. This Essay argues that as a starting point, exceptions should be understood as permissions that limit the scope of the substantive treaty obligations, and not as defenses invoked to justify prima facie unlawful conduct. Understanding exceptions as permissions has several advantages, including the avoidance of double-counting a government’s motivation for its conduct or, more problematically, failing to take regulatory purpose into account when determining whether a government has complied with the treaty’s substantive obligations. Understanding exceptions as permissions also sends signals to adjudicators in relation to issues such as the appropriate standard of review. The Essay also explores the desirability of including exceptions in treaties in light of recent innovations that clarify the substantive content of investment obligations. Although the uncertain analytic character of existing exceptions risks constraining rather than preserving regulatory space, they may be an important failsafe in light of current institutional arrangements for investor-state dispute settlement, which effectively preclude review for error of law. The Essay concludes that the relationship between standards of investment protection and exceptions needs further consideration, and suggests that governments negotiating investment treaties ought to more holistically consider the aims of the regime and the role of exceptions therein

    Variations on a Theme: Comparing the Concept of Necessity in International Investment Law and WTO Law

    Get PDF
    The concept of necessity is used in many legal systems to delimit permissible from prohibited measures where such measures negatively affect the regime\u27s primary values, such as human rights, liberalized trade, and protection of foreign investment. International investment tribunals have adopted a variety of approaches to the question of whether a measure is necessary to achieve its objective in relation to a number of provisions of investment treaties, including non-precluded measures clauses and fair and equitable treatment. Yet their approaches to this form of analysis are inconsistent and generally not analytically robust. By comparison, WTO tribunals have developed relatively sophisticated methods for analyzing a measure\u27s necessity to achieve its objective in the context of general exceptions, sanitary and phytosanitary measures and technical regulations. The WTO approach generally takes into account a number of factors, including the importance of a measure\u27s objective, a measure\u27s effectiveness at achieving that objective, and the availability of alternative measures. Importantly, WTO tribunals generally undertake this analysis with a degree of deference, in recognition of the right of governments to set their own policy priorities. Investment tribunals could usefully employ aspects of the WITO approach to necessity\u27 in the context of non-precluded measures, fair and equitable treatment, non-discrimination, and non-expropriation. Such an approach would go some way toward the development of a consistent, coherent bod of cases in relation to the concept of necessity in international investment law, providing greater certainty for both host states and investors

    Investigations on the Turbulent Wake of a Generic Space Launcher Geometry in the Hypersonic Flow Regime

    Get PDF
    The turbulent wake flow of generic rocket configurations is investigated experimentally and numerically at a freestream Mach number of 6.0 and a unit Reynolds number of 10 x 10^6. The flow condition is based on the trajectory of Ariane V at an altitude of 50 km, which is used as baseline to address the overarching tasks of wake flows in the hypersonic regime like fluid-structural coupling, reverse hot jets and base heating. Experiments using pressure transducers and high-speed schlieren measurement technique were conducted to gain insight into the local pressure fluctuations on the base and the oscillations of the recompression shock. This experimental configuration features a wedge-profiled strut orthogonally mounted to the main body. Additionally, the influence of cylindrical nozzle extensions attached to the base of the rocket is investigated, which is the link to the numerical investigations. Here, the axisymmetric model possesses a cylindrical sting support of the same diameter as the nozzle extensions. The sting support allows investigations of a undisturbed wake flow. A time-accurate zonal RANS/LES approach was applied to identify shocks, expansion waves, and the highly unsteady recompression region numerically. Subsequently, experimental and numerical results in the strut-averted region are opposed with regard to the wall pressure and recompression shock frequency spectra. For the compared configurations, experimental pressure spectra exhibit dominant Strouhal numbers at about S rD = 0.03 and 0.27 and the recompression shock oscillates at 0.2. In general, the numerical pressure and recompression shock fluctuations agree satisfactorily to the experimental results. The experiments with a blunt base reveal base-pressure spectra with dominant Strouhal numbers at 0.08 at the center position and 0.145, 0.21 − 0.22 and 0.31 − 0.33 at the outskirts of the base
    corecore