Legal Doctrines for the U.S. Federal Courts and the International Investment Arbitral Tribunals in Adjudicating the Climate Change Disputes
- 주제(키워드) 기후변화 , 공적 신탁과 공적 소란 , 중독 , 공정 조치와 강제수용 , 투자중재 , Climate Change , Public Trust and Public Nuisance Doctrine , Addiction , FET and Expropriation , Investment Arbitration
- 주제(기타) 무역학
- 설명문(URI) https://www.kci.go.kr/kciportal/ci/sereArticleSearch/ciSereArtiView.kci?sereArticleSearchBean.artiId=ART002877329
- 등재 KCI등재
- 발행기관 한국중재학회
- 발행년도 2022
- URI http://www.dcollection.net/handler/ewha/000000193968
- 본문언어 영어
초록/요약
기후변화는 인간이 만들어낸 재앙이다. 기후변화 분쟁을 법적으로 해결하기 위해 국제사법재판소는 No Harm Rule, 미국연방법원은 Public Trust Doctrine, Public Nuisance Doctrine을 개발해왔고, 국제투자중재판정부는 Fair and Equitable Doctrine, Indirect Expropriation Doctrine을 개발하여 왔다. 본 논문에서는 이들 Doctrine의 법적인 구성요소를 살펴보고 이러한 구성요소들이 활용된 판정을 살펴보면서 기후변화에 대한 분쟁에 관하여 중재판정부의 역할의 정도를 살펴보고자 한다.
more초록/요약
Climate change is a man-made disaster that has become a major global concern today. With increasingly visible symptoms of climate change in recent years, it has become evident that climate action can no longer be dismissed as a mere matter of choice, but as a matter of survival for the human being. To address the impending climate change crisis in a collaborative and sustainable manner, the international community has been taking various measures including Kyoto protocol and the Paris Agreement. With respect to the private investor’s project investment in line with international agreements on climate change, recently we have seen multiple legal judgments which clearly indicate the subject of judicial responsibility for investment in climate change related projects. However, in order to hold judicial responsibility occurring during the implementation of climate change related projects, a causal relationship between the responsible entities and clear responsibility must be demonstrated, and applicable institutional arrangements need to be arranged. It may be the right time for global community to consider shifting not only to human ethical obligations but also legal obligations. In this regard, concerned governments should consider legislating arbitration laws, regulations, and institutional arrangements in more specific and applicable manner.
more