東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Jurisprudence for prudential measure...

Jung, Byungsik.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Jurisprudence for prudential measures in international trade in financial services.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Jurisprudence for prudential measures in international trade in financial services./
作者:	Jung, Byungsik.
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2009,
面頁冊數:	125 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 71-08, Section: A, page: 3012.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International71-08A.
標題:	Law. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3416995
ISBN:	9781124114712

Jurisprudence for prudential measures in international trade in financial services.
Jung, Byungsik.

Jurisprudence for prudential measures in international trade in financial services. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2009 - 125 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 71-08, Section: A, page: 3012.

Thesis (S.J.D.)--American University, 2009.

Prudential measures are financial regulations for consumer protection, soundness of financial institution and stability of financial markets A prudential measure is the most powerful affirmative defense since it prevails over all obligations and commitments under international treaties as long as it is not abused. A host state has a wide discretion in regulating prudential measures and thus is tempted to use them as non-tariff trade barriers. Furthermore, prudential measures would result in regulatory expropriation and thus a host state would be obliged to compensate a foreign investor's loss. Therefore, this paper is to develop a standard of review for jurisprudence on prudential measure in order to prevent abuse of prudential discretion. In addition, this paper aims to prove that prudential measures are not subject to regulatory expropriation and compensation as long as they fall within police power.

ISBN: 9781124114712Subjects--Topical Terms:

600858
Law.

Jurisprudence for prudential measures in international trade in financial services.
LDR:03442nmm a2200313 4500 001 2157933
005 20180608141654.5
008 190424s2009 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781124114712
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI3416995
035 $a AAI3416995
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Jung, Byungsik. $3 3345751
245 1 0 $a Jurisprudence for prudential measures in international trade in financial services.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2009
300 $a 125 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 71-08, Section: A, page: 3012.
500 $a Adviser: James Holbein.
502 $a Thesis (S.J.D.)--American University, 2009.
520 $a Prudential measures are financial regulations for consumer protection, soundness of financial institution and stability of financial markets A prudential measure is the most powerful affirmative defense since it prevails over all obligations and commitments under international treaties as long as it is not abused. A host state has a wide discretion in regulating prudential measures and thus is tempted to use them as non-tariff trade barriers. Furthermore, prudential measures would result in regulatory expropriation and thus a host state would be obliged to compensate a foreign investor's loss. Therefore, this paper is to develop a standard of review for jurisprudence on prudential measure in order to prevent abuse of prudential discretion. In addition, this paper aims to prove that prudential measures are not subject to regulatory expropriation and compensation as long as they fall within police power.
520 $a In order to develop an appropriate standard for prudential discretion, this paper reviewed various standards regarding abuse of discretion such as a good-faith principle, margin of appreciation, state of necessity and fair and equitable treatment. The common criterion applicable to all standards above is a good-faith principle. Therefore, a prudential discretion also must meet the following requirements deriving from a good-faith principle: (i) prudential purpose, (ii) reasonable relationship between prudential purpose and a taken measure, and (iii) balance between secured prudential supervision and impaired interest.
520 $a Regulatory expropriation is a host state's substantial interference with a foreign investor's property or with the investor's legitimate expectation. Regulatory expropriation requires compensation unless it falls within police power. Police power is the exercise of a state's regulatory discretion which is conducted in a good-faith manner. This police power does not amount to a significant deprivation of a investor's property compared to a secured public interest, and thus is not subject to compensation. In fact, a regulatory expropriation hardly exists in financial services because financial services are heavily regulated to the extent that foreign investors would expect that their investment will be interfered by a host state for prudential reasons. Furthermore, prudential carve-out can be a good defense against regulatory expropriation because a state's regulatory action for prudential reasons is likely to fall within the police power.
590 $a School code: 0008.
650 4 $a Law. $3 600858
650 4 $a Banking. $2 bicssc $3 1557594
690 $a 0398
690 $a 0770
710 2 $a American University. $3 2092599
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 71-08A.
790 $a 0008
791 $a S.J.D.
792 $a 2009
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3416995