制定冲突披露的通用标准

IF 1.1 3区 社会学 Q2 LAW Icsid Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal Pub Date : 2023-05-09 DOI:10.1093/icsidreview/siad011
A. Mourre
{"title":"制定冲突披露的通用标准","authors":"A. Mourre","doi":"10.1093/icsidreview/siad011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Amongst the many reforms of international arbitration that are currently discussed, the adoption of a universal standard for conflicts disclosures is particularly necessary. Currently, the subjective standard “in the eyes of the parties” that is adopted by the IBA Guidelines and the ICC Rules coexist with the objective standard “from the perspective of a fair-minded and informed observer”, as defined by the English Supreme Court in Halliburton. The author submits that the IBA-ICC standard is preferable for it fosters more complete disclosures and encourages transparency. However, the subjective standard does not eliminate the moral hazard of non-disclosures and the author recommends that it be combined with a purely objective requirement to disclose based on a pre-established list of circumstances.","PeriodicalId":44986,"journal":{"name":"Icsid Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"For a Universal Standard for Conflicts Disclosures\",\"authors\":\"A. Mourre\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/icsidreview/siad011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Amongst the many reforms of international arbitration that are currently discussed, the adoption of a universal standard for conflicts disclosures is particularly necessary. Currently, the subjective standard “in the eyes of the parties” that is adopted by the IBA Guidelines and the ICC Rules coexist with the objective standard “from the perspective of a fair-minded and informed observer”, as defined by the English Supreme Court in Halliburton. The author submits that the IBA-ICC standard is preferable for it fosters more complete disclosures and encourages transparency. However, the subjective standard does not eliminate the moral hazard of non-disclosures and the author recommends that it be combined with a purely objective requirement to disclose based on a pre-established list of circumstances.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44986,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Icsid Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Icsid Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/icsidreview/siad011\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Icsid Review-Foreign Investment Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/icsidreview/siad011","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在目前正在讨论的许多国际仲裁改革中,采用冲突披露的通用标准尤为必要。目前,IBA指南和ICC规则所采用的“在当事人眼中”的主观标准与英国最高法院在哈里伯顿案中所定义的“从公正和知情的观察者的角度”的客观标准并存。发件人认为,国际律师协会-国际商会标准是可取的,因为它促进了更全面的披露和鼓励透明度。然而,主观标准并不能消除不披露的道德风险,作者建议将其与基于预先确定的一系列情况的纯粹客观的披露要求结合起来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
For a Universal Standard for Conflicts Disclosures
Amongst the many reforms of international arbitration that are currently discussed, the adoption of a universal standard for conflicts disclosures is particularly necessary. Currently, the subjective standard “in the eyes of the parties” that is adopted by the IBA Guidelines and the ICC Rules coexist with the objective standard “from the perspective of a fair-minded and informed observer”, as defined by the English Supreme Court in Halliburton. The author submits that the IBA-ICC standard is preferable for it fosters more complete disclosures and encourages transparency. However, the subjective standard does not eliminate the moral hazard of non-disclosures and the author recommends that it be combined with a purely objective requirement to disclose based on a pre-established list of circumstances.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
27.30%
发文量
46
期刊最新文献
Australia’s Ambivalence Again Around Investor-State Arbitration: Comparisons with Europe and Implications for Asia The Duty of Arbitrators to Raise Suspected Corruption or to Investigate Poorly Particularized Allegations of Corruption Contextual Impartiality: A New Approach to Assessing Impartiality in Investor-State Dispute Settlement Does an Annulled Award Constitute Legal Authority in Investment Arbitration? Impartiality and the Construction of Trust in Investor-State Dispute Settlement
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1