Business Law
Godarz Eftekhar Jahromi; Ahmad Heidari
Abstract
AbstractBalancing the relationship between The Full protection and Security Standard (FPS) and the public health is one of the oldest challenges within the body of the international investment laws; since the protection of public health, without regulating the host countries, leaves room for harm to ...
Read More
AbstractBalancing the relationship between The Full protection and Security Standard (FPS) and the public health is one of the oldest challenges within the body of the international investment laws; since the protection of public health, without regulating the host countries, leaves room for harm to foreign investment, and the strict protection of foreign investment, can lead to the losing the public and fundamental interests of the host country.Therefore, within the current paper, there is an attempt to examine the legal system that overrules these concerns within the body of the international investment laws.The question which remains is how can host countries maintain their public health whithout breach of the Full Protection and Security Standard, and Creating their international responsibilities.This study shows that, the international investment laws do not take a clear stance when it comes to regulating the relationship between public health, and the implementation of (FPS), and that they are in fact in some cases paradoxical and disorganize .For example, although the fight against Covid-19, as an example of public health through quarantine, restrictions and bans, Recognizes the right of sovereignty of the host country, it may also have an international responsibility for them.
Private Law
Mohammad Arian
Abstract
Fraud as an exception to the principle of independence of documentary credit from the underlying contract is one of the key challenges facing the issuing bank, which in particular has been more the center of attention in deferred payment letter of credits. In case, the proceeds of the credit are assigned ...
Read More
Fraud as an exception to the principle of independence of documentary credit from the underlying contract is one of the key challenges facing the issuing bank, which in particular has been more the center of attention in deferred payment letter of credits. In case, the proceeds of the credit are assigned to third party by the beneficiary through the discount of the credit and it is later discovered that the beneficiary had committed fraud, so in such a case, this question arises whether in Iranian legal system, the third party assignee shall be immune from the effects of fraud committed by the beneficiary? In this regard, some believe that according to the general rule that "no one can transfer to another more rights than he has", the assignee of proceeds shall not be immune from the effects of fraud. From a comparative law perspective, there are two profoundly different approaches concerning the impact of fraud on the rights of the assignee of proceeds. According to the first approach accepted in the English legal system, an assignee of proceeds shall not be immune from fraud, even if it is considered as a bona fide holder. However, according to the second approach which is reflected in Section 109 of Article 5 of the US Uniform Commercial Code, the assignee shall be immune from fraud on condition that it is considered as a bona fide holder. In Iranian legal system, although there is no specific law in the field of documentary credits, such a person must be immune from the effects of fraud having regard to the banking practice, case law, and legal doctrine, as this is requisite for maintaining the commercial utility of letter of credit as an important financing mechanism.
Business Law
Ali Rezaee
Abstract
Governments have recently incorporated foreign investment treaties into a so-called “Non-Precluded Measure Clause ", which permits action contrary to the provisions of the treaty in cases where the protection of essential interests is necessary. In this descriptive-analytical method, this article ...
Read More
Governments have recently incorporated foreign investment treaties into a so-called “Non-Precluded Measure Clause ", which permits action contrary to the provisions of the treaty in cases where the protection of essential interests is necessary. In this descriptive-analytical method, this article outlines the most important challenges and explains the ways to eliminate or reduce them. The most important findings of the study indicate that the government's authority in practice was not absolute, but observable. The host government must impartially resort to this clause and is always obliged to respect the good faith towards another party. Despite the disagreement expressed in the liability of the host States, the dominant approach of dispute settlement tribunals is to compensate the investor in proportion to the loss incurred by him. Governments have recently incorporated foreign investment treaties into a so-called “Non-Precluded Measure Clause ", which permits action contrary to the provisions of the treaty in cases where the protection of essential interests is necessary
