Main directions of operation of the enterprise include production and realization of batteries as well essay as recycling of used storage batteries and lead waste. Enterprise capacity is equal to 800. Batteries and recycling of 8 tons of lead waste. At present, more than 550 people work for plant. Today, the enterprise produces more than 30 types of batteries for motor cars and agricultural techniques. There is a stable demand for production on local and foreign markets. Volumes of production and sales grow by 10-12 annually.
North Korea says talks with Pompeo were 'regrettable'. High-level talks between the United States and North Korea appeared to hit a snag today as pyongyang said a visit by us secretary of State mike pompeo had been "regrettable" and accused Washington of making "gangster-like" demands to pressure the country into abandoning its nuclear. The statement from the north came just hours after Pompeo wrapped up two days of talks with senior North Korean officials without meeting North Korean leader Kim Jong Un but with commitments for new discussions on denuclearisation and the repatriation of the remains of American. While pompeo offered a relatively positive assessment of his meetings, north Korea's Foreign Ministry said in a statement that the us betrayed the spirit of last month's summit between President Donald Trump and Kim by making "unilateral and gangster-like" demands on "cvid or the complete. It said the outcome of the. Another 1 image ( show twitter rooting out fake accounts at record rate: report. Twitter has been suspending more than one million fake and dubious accounts per day, according to The washington Post, in an aggressive bid to stem the flow of false information.
Investor Education Seminars Self Managed Super Fund
The proposal also adopted the principle of indirect expropriation without compensation, which can be found already in the nafta agreement. According to world this principle, a state which expropriates an investor, for example, by withdrawing a permit or imposing a huge tax bill, does not have to pay any compensation, except in rare circumstances, which are not defined further. Considering the fact that most investment arbitration business disputes concern indirect expropriation, this is a significant limitation for investors to receive any compensation. It is obvious that this proposal, if accepted by the us, will make investment arbitration proceedings prohibitive in several ways. Firstly, the appeal possibility is a standing invitation for States to delay proceedings further and push up costs for the claimant. This is further exacerbated by the fact that the claimant faces the risk of having to pay all the legal costs of the State as well. Secondly, the fact that the claimant can no longer select an arbitrator puts the claimant in a disadvantageous position compared to the respondent States, which will naturally select only pro-State judges.
Thus, there is a real danger that the proceedings will not be fair and impartial anymore. Thirdly, by excluding state aid and indirect expropriation claims from arbitration, important grounds for arbitration proceedings are excluded upfront, which begs the question why should an investor use this arbitration system at all. In sum, this proposal, if adopted, will mark the end of classic investment arbitration. The proposal clearly aims at discouraging in various ways investors from bringing arbitration claims against States. Consequently, investors are well-advised to seek expert legal advice regarding other ways on how to ensure optimal investment protection, including access to international arbitration. Gip offers tailored-made solutions and is ready to advise any investor. Market search for investment opportunities economic, marketing, sociological, personnel and environmental analysis evaluation of companies identification of investment risks, verification of significant information financial, accounting and tax audit - due diligence providing legal, business, marketing, technological and environmental audit as well as audits of safety.
Another interesting element concerns the distribution of the costs of the procedures. The general principle proposed is that the losing party shall pay all legal costs, including the costs of the other party (loser pays principle). The proposal also introduces a number of new ways for the States to intervene directly in the proceedings. Firstly, all States (including the State that is Respondent in a dispute) which are party to the treaty can adopt interpretations, that are binding on the tfi and at and which can even be issued with retroactive effect. Secondly, all States can intervene as non-disputing third parties in the proceedings by making oral and written statements.
Thirdly, also ngos not involved in the dispute can submit so called amicus curiae briefs to the tfi and at, which must in principle be admitted. Obviously, the first two options allow the States to directly intervene in ongoing disputes in order to make sure that the tfi and at render the right decisions,. E., decisions which are consistent with the views of the States. Besides, these institutional aspects, the proposal contain several interesting innovations. For example, in direct reaction to the, micula case on which we have reported in our previous newsletters, the commission proposes to exclude all state aid issues from any arbitration. Also, as we discussed in our last newsletter, the commission has included a provision requiring the claimant to disclose the name and address of any third-party funder, thereby creating the impression that third-party funding is somehow dodgy.
Canadian Investment Network - connecting Canadian
A judgment should in principle be rendered within 18 months, although the tfi can decide to go beyond it without an explicit maximum, which means proceedings can easily take much longer. The proposal also mentions the possibility that if both parties agree, a tree case may be dealt with by a sole arbitrator, which could be particularly useful for smes because of the lower costs involved. The at is envisaged as a permanent body composed of 6 judges (2 eu, 2 us and 2 third country judges). Also those judges would be appointed for 6 years, renewable once, and should have the qualifications for appointment to the highest judicial offices or be jurists of recognised competence. The appeal must be brought before the at within 90 days after the issuances of the tfi award and will be heard by chambers of 3 judges. The proposal mentions a number of grounds for appeal, such as for example (a) that the tfi erred in the interpretation or application of the applicable law; (b) that the tfi has manifestly erred in the appreciation of the facts, including the appreciation of relevant. Interestingly, the proposal sets a limit for the duration of the appeal procedure, which should last 6 months with a maximum of 9 months in exceptional cases. Accordingly, theoretically the whole two-tier procedure should last no more than 27 months or 2 years and 3 months.
Another advantage is the fact that there are only limited grounds for annulment or setting aside of an award, which means that in principle an award is final and binding. All this has been working pretty well in the past 50 years. Nonetheless, within the context of the ttip negotiations, the european Commission proposes the ics, which would radically break with the classic system of investment arbitration. The proposal envisages a two-tier court system, consisting of a tribunal of First analysis Instance (TFI) and an Appeal Tribunal (AT). The tfi would consist of 15 judges (5 eu, 5 us and 5 third country judges) commonly appointed by the States. These judges should have the qualifications required for appointment to judicial offices or be jurists of recognized competence and would be appointed for 6 years, renewable once. The cases would be heard by chambers of 3 judges.
been created and fuelled by ngos and the media that investment arbitration is a system that only benefits investors and is detrimental to public interests of the state and its citizens. But statistics show that states win more cases than investors. More generally, the critics fail to appreciate that legal certainty and access to independent judicial bodies is essential for every foreign investor. That is the very reason why investment arbitration has been included in more than 3,000 Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) worldwide. The classic system of investment arbitration is very much driven by party autonomy. This means that the investor is free to choose an arbitrator, the respondent State selects one arbitrator and both arbitrators agree on the chairing arbitrator. Moreover, the investor can usually choose from several arbitration rules such as icsid, uncitral, scc or icc which are to be applied to the dispute. Also, after the award has been issued, the investor can chose in which country he wants to enforce that award.
A community directive is needed to achieve the necessary minimum harmonisation to provide a basis for mutual recognition of investor compensation arrangements. The proposal envisages a harmonised minimum investor compensation cover of ecu.000 to protect the smaller investor where an investment firm fails and is unable to return to investor money or securities belonging to them. A similar level of coverage has been proposed by the commission (1) com(93)381 (2) IP(92)943 of 23/11/92 in its amended proposal for a directive on bank deposit guarantee schemes which permitted the adoption of a common Position at the eco-fin council of 13 September. Member States mom would remain free to provide for investor compensation in excess of the harmonised minimum. The proposal would leave to member States the details concerning the organisation and financing of investor compensation schemes. It is envisaged that the directive should enter into force on the same date as Investment Services Directive, that. Download this article as a pdf. In the light of increasing critique against classic investment arbitration, the european Commission recently published a proposal for the establishment of an international Investment court System (ics which it proposed to the us within the context of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (ttip) agreement. If concluded, ttip would create a comprehensive bilateral trade and investment agreement between the two biggest economies in the world.
Investment, management no-action and Interpretive
(1) On a proposal. Vanni d'archirafi, commissioner responsible for Internal Market and Financial Services, the commission adopted today a proposal for a directive on investor compensation essay schemes. This proposal will be presented to the council and the european Parliament. When the Investment Services Directive, which provides the "European Passport" for investment firms was adopted by the council on 10 may(2) the commission, at the request of the member States, stated its intention of presenting a proposal on investor compensation. The main aim of the proposal is to complete and help ensure the proper functioning of the single market for investment services by introducing a minimum Community level of investor compensation and by bringing investor compensation arrangements under the regime of home country control. Each Community investment firm holding the single licence will be required to belong to an investor compensation scheme in its home State and that scheme will cover all the firm's investor clients including those in other Member States doing business with the firm's branches. Vanni d'archirafi, the commissioner responsible for the internal market and financial services, described this new proposal as a modest but nonetheless important step towards increasing investor protection and confidence in the single market. Although most of the member States have some investor compensation arrangements, the vast majority do not have schemes corresponding to the coverage of the Investment Services Directive.