Your search
Results 57 resources
-
The arguments raised by opponents of parallel importation can be divided into two broad categories: an economic argument relating to the detrimental effect of intra-brand competition and an intellectual property (IP) argument relating to the interpretation of the relevant IP statutes to prohibit parallel importation. As a vehicle for controlling or prohibiting parallel importation it is not at all clear that IP law was specifically intended to address the issue of parallel importation. Statutory protection of IP did not arise out of any concept of natural justice or any related theory underlying property ownership at common law but rather, out of a conscious policy decision on the part of Government. Increased IP protection has become integral to the US and Canada's perceptions of their future economic growth. The law of restitution68 or the development of misappropriation/unfair competition principles have been suggested as viable means of offering some form of protection to right-holders and distributors without broadening the IP monopoly.
-
This Memorial seeks to present a framework of legal arguments with respect to the validity and and legal effects of an arms embargo emposed by United Nations Security Council Resolution 713 in September 1991 on the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Yugoslavia), before its dissolution, and since treated as being in force with respect to the new states that have succeeded Yugoslavia. More particularly, the Memorial addresses the legality of maintaining (or at least, having maintained during the crucial time period) the arms embargo in force, either de jure or de facto, against the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Bosnia) in light of evdience that the arm's embargo's maintenance vis-a-vis Bosnia has contributed to the inability of the Government of Bosnia to prevent the perpetration on Bosnia's territory of acts of genocide by Bosnian Serb forces as well as combined acts of genocide and aggression by the neighboring state of Serbia and Montenegro (Serbia). [Co-authored with Craig Scott, Abid Qureshi, Paul Michell, Peter Copeland and Francis Chang]
-
THE issue of retroactive application of the ‘New York Convention of 1958 on the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards'’1 has already been raised in a number of cases and articles. While the latter tend to agree that the Convention was meant to apply retroactively2 the former show somewhat less homogeneity on that question.3 Nevertheless, this issue remains very much alive with respect to the ever increasing number of states acceding to the Convention. In the last five years, 50 new states have become parties to the Convention, raising the total number to 83 member states.4The Convention contains no explicit reference to its retroactive application nor is its history conclusive on this issue.5 Some implementing statutes of the Convention deal expressly with its temporal application. Indeed, at least five of them state expressly a date from which the Convention is applicable.6 On the other hand, at least two others state expressly that the Convention applies without any restriction in time.7
Explore
Author / Editor
- Anneke Smit (1)
- Brian Manarin (3)
- Christopher Waters (4)
- David Tanovich (6)
- Jasminka Kalajdzic (4)
- Jeff Berryman (8)
- Laverne Jacobs (2)
- Myra Tawfik (3)
- Pascale Chapdelaine (1)
- Paul Ocheje (4)
- Richard Moon (20)
- Tess Sheldon (1)
Resource type
- Book (2)
- Book Section (4)
- Film (1)
- Journal Article (42)
- Preprint (4)
- Thesis (4)