Refine
Document Type
- Doctoral Thesis (11) (remove)
Language
- English (11) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (11)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (11) (remove)
Keywords
- AIFMD (1)
- Afghanistan (1)
- Black Sea (1)
- Credit rating agencies (1)
- Dodd-Frank Act (1)
- Financial regulation (1)
- Foreign Investment Insurance (1)
- Investment Protection (1)
- Liability regime (1)
- Political Risk Insurance (1)
Institute
- Rechtswissenschaft (11) (remove)
The mainstream law and economics approach has dominated positive analysis and normative design of economic regulations. This approach represents a form of applied neoclassical and new institutional economics. Neoclassical and/or new institutional economic theories, models, and analytical concepts are applied automatically to economic regulatory problems.
This automatic application of neoclassical economics to economic regulatory problems loses sight of the valid insights of non-neoclassical schools of economic thought and theories, which may illuminate important aspects of the regulatory problems. This thesis, therefore, advocates an integrated law and economics approach to economic regulations. This approach identifies the relevant insights of neoclassical and non-neoclassical schools of thought and theories and refines them through a process of cross-criticism. In this process, the insights of each school of thought are subjected to the critiques of other schools of thought. The resulting refined insights, which are more likely to be valid, are then integrated consistently through various techniques of integration.
Not only does neoclassical (micro and macro) law and economics overlook the valid insights of non-neoclassical schools of thought, it is also highly reductionist. It ignores the interdependencies of legal institutions, highlighted mainly by the comparative capitalism literature, and the structural interlinkages among socio-economic actors, highlighted by economic sociology and complexity economics. Rather, it takes rational individuals and their interactions subject to the constraint of isolated institution(s) as its unit of analysis. In place of this reductionist perspective, the thesis argues for a systemic approach to economic regulations. This systemic perspective replaces the reductionist unit of neoclassical regulatory analysis with a systemic unit of analysis that consists of the least non-decomposable actors’ network and its associated least non-decomposable institutional network. Then, the thesis develops an operationalized and replicable systemic framework for systemic analysis and design of institutional networks.
Both the systemic and integrated approaches are theoretically consistent and complementary. The systemic approach is in essence a way of thinking that requires a broad and rich informational basis that can be secured by using the integrated approach. Due to their complementarity, they give rise to what I call “the integrated and systemic law and economics approach.” The thesis operationalizes this approach by setting out well-defined replicable steps and applying them to concrete regulatory problems, namely, the choice of a corporate governance model for developing countries and the development of a normative theory of economic regulations. These concrete applications demonstrate the critical bite of the integrated and systemic approach, which reveals significant shortcomings of mainstream law and economics’ answers to these regulatory questions. They also show the constructive potential of the integrated and systemic approach in overcoming the critiques advanced to the neoclassical regulatory conclusions.
The operationalized integrated and systemic approach is both a law and economics as well as a law and development approach. It does not only provide an alternative to mainstream law and economics analysis and design of economic regulations. It also fills a significant analytical lacuna in the law and development literature that lacks an analytical framework for analysis and design of context-specific legal institutions that can promote economic development in developing economies.
The dissertation explores to what extent the post-financial crisis EU resolution regime, based on equity/debt write-down and conversion powers and bail-in tools will be effective in maintaining the stability of bank groups. To arrive at its unique angle, it first asks why bank groups are considered complex, thereby explaining the reasons for their proliferation and instability, and how this may inform the view regarding a desired regulatory framework. The main observation the dissertation makes is that, notwithstanding of other factors already pointed out in the literature, bank groups adopt complex structures with multiple entities, as it allows them, inter alia, to use double-leverage financing structures and internal capital markets.
Double-leverage financing structures allow bank groups to optimise the combination of their debt/equity funding from external parent entity investors with a combination of debt/equity funding downstreamed internally to subsidiaries and other entities in the bank group. An important component within this structure is also that the allocation of the bank group’s resources takes place through the internal capital market (ICM). The allocation of resources via the ICM allows bank groups to manage their liquidity constraint either to undertake activities that are more profitable, or to stabilise the financial position of the group as a whole.
While both double leverage and ICMs can optimise the funding and allocation of resources of the bank group, respectively, they can also generate perils to the stability of the bank group. In particular, this is because double-leverage can result in excessive risk taking and regulatory arbitrage. Moreover, the allocation of the intra-group resources in the ICM may not maintain the financial health of all subsidiaries in the bank group, which can prove to be incompatible with the financial stability goals of the regulators in the countries where those subsidiaries conduct their business.
Within this context, the dissertation argues that the current EU resolution regime does not clearly address issues of double leverage when setting out capital and other liability requirements, i.e. the ‘Total Loss Absorbing Capacity’ (TLAC) and ‘Minimum Requirement for Eligible Liabilities’ (MREL) requirements. Moreover, the dissertation emphasis that it is equally relevant to clarify the way in which the bank group resources are available ahead of, and in financial distress. It is argued that to this end, bank groups need to be allowed to make use of the ICM as it is often uncertain what may be the cause of the financial distress and how the resources of the bank group could be used to stabilise it. To this end, the dissertation highlights that there is lack of clarity in both the ex-ante provisions on intra-group support framework and in the ex-post provisions governing the allocation of any surplus TLAC/MREL resources.
Besides the ‘intra-group’ issues within the bank group, the third point the dissertation makes relation to the bank group’s presence in multiple jurisdictions. This transnational element adds to the complexity of the intra-group issues resulting from sub-optimal cooperation between home and host authorities. In this regard, the dissertation underlines that the current framework could adopt a more balanced way in which the regulatory fora will take into account the interest of the authorities of all parts of the bank group.
This research attempts to provide for an overview of the state of co-operation between the United Nations and regional organizations like the CoE, OSCE, EU and NATO during the last Yugoslav wars, considering the 1991-2008 period. In this case, the "reconstruction" of what the organisations did in each of the countries involved in the conflicts, the country-by-country approach used in writing the research and the consideration of both headquarters and field level should facilitate the understanding of the state of things at that time. The research further includes an analysis of the co-operative trends developed by the considered international organisations since the beginning of the 1990s and is concluded by a reflection on the normative relevance of the issue of "international cooperation". In this case, the intention of the author was to go beyond the general policy level approach used for the description of UN-regional organizations interaction and propose a re-consideration of the concept of "international co-operation" as a possible normative tool in guiding the so far nebulous division of tasks of international actors in conflict-related scenarios. In this case, the concise description of the general framework for co-operation under Chapter VIII of the UN Charter, already matter of wide debate by academics and practitioners, sets the frame for a more elaborate, and hopefully innovative, consideration of the notion of "international cooperation". This, of course, is to be contextualized to the lessons learned extrapolated from the case study.
The purpose of this thesis is to achieve two highly interconnected yet distinct tasks. On the one hand, the thesis explains how foreign investment insurance works by focusing on the law governing the relationships between involved actors. On the other hand, it provides a critique of the operation of foreign investment insurance as an investment protection instrument by mainly drawing on critical studies of the investment protection regime.
The main question this thesis attempts to answer is how foreign investment insurance works. I construe foreign investment insurance as a typical insurance product and focus on the operation of insurance arrangements from a legal perspective. Ideas about how insurance should be deployed in any given social, political or economic context are instrumental in the development of insurers, insurance products and insurance techniques. The thesis examines investment insurers, the products they offer and their techniques to identify and deal with so-called political risks.
Another important question concerns the notion of political risk. What are considered political risks in the context of investment insurance and how are they conceptualized by investment insurance providers? Investment insurers have largely adopted a business-oriented political risk definition which denotes governmental intervention in foreign investment as political risk without regard to the objectives of government actions. Descriptive studies explain political risk by replicating investment insurers’ categorization of basic coverages that include expropriation, currency inconvertibility and remittance transfer restrictions, political violence and breach of contract. Yet recent studies have increasingly provided in-depth analyses on the notion of political risk as well as on the specific categories of political risk, particularly expropriation. The thesis draws on these studies to critically discuss the concept of political risk as it is used by investment insurance providers.
I focus on foreign investment insurance provided by OPIC and MIGA due to their mandate to promote economic development in the capital-importing countries and for their historical role as the major providers of investment insurance. While focus is on MIGA and OPIC, the thesis offers a general account of the operation of foreign investment insurance by incorporating the available information on investment insurance industry and the international governance of investment insurance. The central issues explored in this thesis such as the principle of subrogation and the notion of political risk help me generalize the study as these issues are characterized similarly with respect to each public investment insurance provider.
The case studies and most examples in this thesis are based on expropriation risk insurance.
Both China and the EU have nearly 30 years of legislative experience on GMOs. However, despite all the experience gained so far and theoretical analyses, due to the social concerns about GMO risk, both China and Germany are still encountering a decision-making dilemma on authorizing green GMOs. Therefore, the dissertation is dedicated to the issue of whether there is a possibility that this dilemma could be resolved by improving or reformulating the administrative risk decision-making mechanism regarding green GMOs. Specifically, the dissertation analyses four concrete questions: operation of classical decision-making on danger prevention, the challenges posed by uncertain risks, the theoretical legal response to uncertain risk, and the functioning of legally constituted decision-making mechanisms for GMOs in Germany/ the EU and China.
Conventionally, danger is a threshold for the executive to intervene in individual liberty. It can ensure the rationality of ex-ante intervention and further guarantee a balance between individual liberty and public safety. Regarding the danger prevention decision-making process, the executive authorities investigate the factual information at first; then, based on reliable and accessible common knowledge about the rule of causality, predict the degree of possible damage and the occurrence probability; at last, make ex-ante intervention decisions to interrupt the causality chain and avoid damages.
In the risk society, uncertain risk of GMOs is characterized as collectively wide-ranging, manufactured, high-technological, and value-oriented. The ex-ante intervention of the administration extends from danger to uncertain risk, i.e., risk precaution. The essential cause of uncertain risk is that humans do not have sufficient knowledge and have not yet grasped the rule of causality regarding new technologies. Due to the lack of a cognitive reference standard, it is not easy for the administration to judge the existence of risks and make rational decisions on risk precaution, which, consequently, amounts to losing the balance between individual freedom and public safety. Besides, if the authority makes a decision ad arbitrium, and expects learning by error, this may cause significant secondary risks.
In the risk management system, there are two primary, partly interrelated strategies to manage risk that are currently used: that is, knowledge generation and proceduralization. Specifically, to de-materialize the legislation, integrate multipartite participation in the decision-making process, and open the procedure for updating the information can contribute to the generation of the requisite knowledge. Proceduralization can assist with knowledge generation, promote the reconciliation of conflicting interests, compensate for material and legal deficits, and control the legitimacy of administrative behavior.
In the final chapter, the laws on GMOs in the EU, Germany, and China are analysed, especially under the perspective of the concrete risk decision-making mechanisms.
Overall, this dissertation argues that law can procedurally guarantee the independence and reliability of experts and ensure that access to public participation is open. But what the law can do to address public trust and scientifically uncertain risks, is limited.
A sound and well-functioning legal system will encourage growth in investment and create opportunities for investors. Trademarks as part of intellectual property play an important role in the future development of a country. A mark or symbol is needed in order to give products and services identity and to distinguish them and their qualities from identical or similar products and services of a competitor.
This research studies, examines and analyses the degree, nature and function of trademark protection within the legal system of Afghanistan and compare them with the Paris, Madrid and TRIPs agreements. It has been divided into four chapters: Chapter one provides general information and an overview of the current legal system of Afghanistan. Chapter two studies and analyses international agreements pertaining to the legal protection of trademark. It also critically assesses the ATML compatibility with these agreements: and answers the research question of to what extent the ATML provisions are compatible with them. Chapter three provides information on the different purposes of trademarks from a development perspective and compares the purposes provided by the ATML. Finally, chapter four assesses and examines the acquisition, assignment and termination of trademarks. The conclusions and findings of the thesis are the final section of this research.
Afghanistan, as a transitioning economy, has not developed a solid legal and practical foundation for providing comprehensive protection mechanisms for trademarks as have been articulated in developed countries and international agreements. Accordingly, the Afghan government has not entirely integrated these needs into its legal system and there are some inconsistencies of the ATML with these agreements.
One more challenge is the lack of appropriate legal institutions for issuing, managing, administering and protecting of trademarks. The establishment of a well-functioning administrative institution will serve to fulfil the objectives of the laws. Therefore, the CBR office holds the administrative responsibility for processing the registration of trademarks.
However, the methods and facilities of the CBR office remain outdated, and the office does not have the capacity to provide applicants with up-to-date administrative and technical facilities.
Therefore, legal protection of trademark in Afghanistan is linked not only to the existence of a well functioning of laws, regulations, clear procedures, mechanism and guidelines but also to an efficient and well-functioning administrative office.
The expansion of actors and instruments in sovereign debt markets through bond financing generated a coordination problem among bondholders during the debt restructuring process. There is a risk that an individual bondholder will be passive or act against the restructuring slowing down or even precluding the process of restructuring even though it is in the general interest of bondholders as a group, not to mention the population of the country experiencing the shortage of funds for public welfare. In particular, the disruptions to sovereign debt restructuring by frivolous litigation is considered as one of the main threats.
This dissertation is the first major study devoted to sovereign bonds structured through a trust arrangement and the promising features that such a legal structure possesses for an effective and efficient sovereign debt restructuring. It provides a comprehensive inquiry into the evolution of the mechanisms to coordinate creditors, with a focus on bondholders and institutional frameworks which facilitated this coordination. It examines intriguing primary sources from League of Nations archives and provides in-depth case studies on the functionality of the trustees in sovereign bond restructurings performed by Argentina in 2016 and Ecuador in 2008.
Assessing the utility of trust arrangements to address coordination problems, this thesis is driven by the puzzle: How to better balance (i) the need for smooth sovereign debt restructurings, which by definition entails some losses for creditors, with (ii) bondholders’ legitimate interests? What approach can be used in constructing a legal and institutional framework for trustees to promote the best interest of the bondholders in sovereign debt restructuring? As a solution, it seems that incentives for bond trustees to pursue debt sustainability will achieve both goals.
In this regard, recognition of the concept of debt sustainability, being in substance the IMF and WB debt sustainability assessment, as the best interest of bondholders in sovereign debt restructuring is beneficial from multiple aspects. It enables a bond trustee to excel in its role as a guardian of bondholders by following the best interest of bondholders in exercising its discretion. Moreover, it fosters an equilibrium between the interests of private creditors and a state taking into account its socio-political aspects.
Private equity has grown remarkably in the last 30 years. Given its rise to prominence, exceptional profitability and a more prolific and publicly visible buyout activity, regulation in the private equity space seemed inevitable. The 2007 global financial crisis furnished an opportunity to doubt the industry’s role and magnify the key concerns, providing momentum for calls to regulate the industry more aggressively. Ultimately, the regulatory change came from the Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (AIFMD), which has been described as one of the most rigorously debated and controversial pieces of financial regulation to ever emerge from the European Union (EU).
The AIFMD is unique and unprecedented, yet there has been very little written about it in the context of private equity. Therefore, this thesis makes a contribution to this area of research by examining the implications of AIFMD for private equity and arguing that this EU Directive has a re-shaping effect on the industry that inevitably marks the end of the light-touch regulation in this area. Whilst the desire of policymakers to act and intervene decisively during market
downturns is understandable, there is a risk that the response may not be appropriate and result in a crisis-induced over-reaction.
This thesis demonstrates, amongst other things, that the AIFMD has created a particularly
complex regulatory regime which for the hitherto unregulated or lightly regulated fund managers has had a significant effect in the EU and beyond. Examples of the most impactful
provisions relate to authorisation, marketing, depositaries, acquisition of control, remuneration, and transparency and disclosure. The implication are wide-ranging, and there is a clear conflict between the opportunities (e.g. EU passport, AIFMD as a global brand) and threats (e.g. excessive compliance costs, exodus of fund managers from the EU), which depend on a firm’s size, domicile and the gap needed to be aligned between the pre- and post-AIFMD regime.
Although there will be no stark triumph of one position over another in the assessment of the AIFMD until all of its elements are fully implemented, overall the impact of the Directive has been material, requiring substantial work to comply with (or adapt to) the requirements, which in some cases are not only particularly onerous and costly, but also a bit misguided, discouraging, or fairly irrelevant.
The Dodd Frank Act of 2010 (DFA) was the legislative response by the US Government to the Global Financial Crisis of 2007. DFA’s rescission of Rule 436 (g) of the Securities Act of 1933 - the exemption from liability clause - was the response to the post-crisis perception that credit rating agencies were insufficiently constrained by reputational risk considerations and consistently failed to provide high quality and accurate credit ratings as a consequence of the immunity they enjoyed and the regulatory reliance placed on ratings, as well as the conflicts of interest that they faced. This paper investigates whether the market failure event that occurred in the Asset Backed Securities market immediately after DFA was signed into law on July 21, 2010 was due to real economic concerns held by rating agencies about operating under a liability regime or whether it was merely an act of brinkmanship on the part of the rating agencies. The paper also predominantly examines US case law to identify the dilution of the freedom of speech defence in state courts, the conflict of interest issues and the legal challenges faced by plaintiffs when bringing a lawsuit against credit rating agencies, and proposes a novel co-pay and capped liability model to address the concerns of both credit rating agencies and investors.
The purpose of this thesis is to examine the passage regime of the Turkish Straits against the background of the evolution of international law, and to discuss the problems of the passage of warships through them in light of the invasion of the Crimean Peninsula by Russia in 2014. With that objective in mind, the thesis reconsiders the history of the straits regime.
The Turkish Straits are regulated by the Montreux Convention of 1936 which contains restrictive and complex provisions regarding the passage of warships. The Straits took their place as “the Straits question” for centuries and today their importance is enhanced by their geostrategic location in the international arena. They have gained greater significance especially since the resolution of Soviet Russia in 1991, as they have become one of the most important and busiest energy corridors of the world. Due to the increase in the transportation of oil, natural gas and other products from the Caspian region through the Straits, the dense traffic and the regulation of the traffic in the Straits has become a key issue between Turkey and user states. Furthermore, the implementation of restrictive provisions for warships caused many debates during the Second World War, the impact of the restrictive provisions of the Convention on the South Ossetia War in August 2008, and the invasion of the Crimean Peninsula in 2014 attracted additional international attention. The Straits took their place on the global agenda of the great powers, especially those of NATO, the United States (US) and Russia. These events have resulted in ongoing and intensive discussions over the revision of the Convention.
Although no legal amendment or modification demand to the Montreux Convention has yet arisen, the new order and geopolitical interests in the Black Sea region show that the Montreux passage regime will continue to be debated by the world’s powers under any given political circumstances. For the time being, however, there will be no alternative route with a view at an adaptation to contemporary needs but methods of treaty modification below the threshold of formal revision as, most importantly, the integration of subsequent practice and subsequent agreement into treaty interpretation.