پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 158 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,232 |
| تعداد مقالات | 67,793 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 115,274,899 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 90,019,563 |
ارزیابی رویة قضایی بریتانیا در حوزة اجرای تعهدات قراردادی متأثر از تحریم کشورها و نهادهای ثالث | ||
| مجله علمی "حقوق خصوصی" | ||
| دوره 20، شماره 1، فروردین 1402، صفحه 153-165 اصل مقاله (1.47 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jolt.2023.357068.1007188 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| سعید باغبان کندری* 1؛ سید حسین سادات میدانی2 | ||
| 1دانشجوی دکترا، دانشکدة حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران | ||
| 2دانشکدة روابط بین‌الملل وزارت امور خارجه، تهران، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| افزایش تحریم‌ها طی دو دهة اخیر، به‌ویژه تحریم‌های یک‌جانبه، مسائل حقوقی متعددی، به طور خاص در اختلافات قراردادی مطروحه نزد دادگاه‌های ملی ایجاد کرده است. این سؤال مطرح است که تحریم‌های وضع‌شده توسط کشور یا نهادی به جز کشور محل استقرار دادگاه چه تأثیری بر قوانین قابل اعمال و تعهدات قراردادی مطروحه در فرایند رسیدگی به اختلافات قراردادی نزد آن دادگاه دارند؟ پر واضح است که دادگاهی که در کشور واضع تحریم مستقر است به تحریم‌های وضع‌شده توسط آن کشور توجه می‌کند. در چنین حالتی و در صورت تعارض تحریم‌ها با حقوق و تعهدات اصحاب دعوا، دادگاه در حکم نهایی خود به آن تحریم‌ها پایبند خواهد بود. حال آیا این دادگاه می‌تواند به تحریم‌های وضع‌شده از سوی کشورها و نهادهای ثالث در فرایند توصیف، تفسیر، و اعمال تعهدات قانونی و قراردادی و نهایتاً صدور حکم ترتیب اثر دهد؟ در این مقاله رویة دادگاه‌های بریتانیا در مواجهه با موضوع تحریم‌ها با منشأ خارجی ارزیابی شد. در نهایت مشخص شد در بریتانیا رویة قضایی واحد در این زمینه وجود ندارد. در برخی موارد حکم بر اساس ملاحظات مربوط به سیاست خارجی بریتانیا صادر شده است و به تحریم‌های دولت ثالث ترتیب اثر داده شده؛ اما در سایر قضایا بدون توجه به این ملاحظات به تحریم‌ها ترتیب اثر داده نشده است. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| اختلاف؛ بریتانیا؛ تحریم؛ دادگاه ملی؛ قرارداد | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Evaluation of United Kingdom Judicial Precedent with regard to Implementation of Contractual Obligations Affected by Third Countries or Institutions' sanctions | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Saeid Baghban Kondori1؛ Seyed Hossein Sadat Meidani2 | ||
| 1Department of Law and Political Sciences, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran | ||
| 2School of International Relations of Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Tehran, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| The increase of sanctions during the last two decades, especially unilateral sanctions, has created numerous legal issues, especially in contractual disputes before national courts. This question is raised, what effect do sanctions imposed by the country or an institution other than the country where the court is located have on the applicable laws and contractual obligations raised in the process of dealing with contractual disputes before that court? It is clear that the court located in the sanctioning country take into consideration the sanctions imposed by that country. In such a case and in case of conflict of sanctions with the rights and obligations of the litigants, the court will adhere to those sanctions in its final ruling. Now, can this court consider the sanctions imposed by third countries and institutions in the process of describing, interpreting and applying legal and contractual obligations? Therefore, in this article, the judicial practice of the UK’s courts in facing the issue of sanctions with foreign origin was evaluated. Finally, it became clear that legal procedure in this field in Britain is not unified; In some cases, the court ruled based on considerations related to UK foreign policy, and the sanctions of the third government were given effect, but in other cases, the sanctions were not given effect regardless of these considerations. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Contract, Dispute, National court, Sanction, United Kingdom | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
BOOK
Azaredo da Silveira. (2014). Trade Sanctions and International Sales. Kluwer.
Beaucillon Charlotte. (2021). Research Handbook on Unilateral and Extraterritorial Sanctions. London. Edward Elgar .
Briggs Adrian. (2013). The Conflict of Laws. 3rd edn. London. Oxford University Press.
Briggs Adrian. (2014). Private International Law in English Courts. London. Oxford UP.
Brunner CJH. (2008). Force Majeure and Hardship under General Contract Principles: Exemption for Nonperformance in International Arbitration. Kluwer Law International.
Carter Peter Basil. (1984). ‘Rejection of Foreign Law: Some Private International Law Inhibitions’ in Ian Brownlie and DW Bowett 55. British Yearbook of International Law.
Collins Lawrence. (2012). Dicey, Morris & Collins on the Conflict of Laws. 15th edn. Vol. 1. Sweet & Maxwell.
Dicey Albert Venn. (1908). A digest of the law of England with reference to the conflict of laws. 2nd edn. London. Stevens and Sons.
Fuchs Angelika. (1990). Freigabe libyschen Vermögens in England trotz US-Einfrierungsbeschluß. Bielefeld. IPRax.
Gold Joseph. (1989). The Fund Agreement in the Courts. Vol. 4. IMF.
Graveson Ronald Harry. (1974). Conflict of Laws. 7th edn. Sweet & Maxwell.
Harris Jonathan. (2009). ‘Mandatory Rules and Public Policy under the Rome I Regulation’ in Franco Ferrari and Stefan Leible (eds). Rome I Regulation, Sellier.
Hartley C. Trevor. (2006). ‘The Modern Approach to Private International Law: International Litigation and Transactions from a Common-Law Perspective’ in Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law. Vol. 319. Nijhoff.
Kinsch Patrick. (1994). Le fait duprince étranger’. LGDJ.
Kuckein Mathias. (2008). Die ‘Berücksichtigung’ von Eingriffsnormen im deutschen und englischen internationalen Vertragsrecht. Mohr Siebeck.
Kunda Ivana. (2007). International Mandatory Rules of a Third Country in European Contract Conflict of Laws: The Rome Convention and the Proposed Rome I Regulation. Rijeka Law Faculty.
Lalive Pierre. (1987). ‘Transnational (or Truly International) Public Policy and International Arbitration’ in Pieter Sanders (ed) Comparative Arbitration Practice and Public Policy in Arbitration. ICCA Congress Series. Vol. 3. New York. Kluwer
Nygh Peter. (1999). Autonomy in International Contracts. Clarendon.
Stone Peter. (2014). EU Private International Law. 3rd edn. London. Edward Elgar.
Szabados Tamás. (2020). Economic Sanctions in EU Private International Law. London. Bloomsbury Publishing.
ARTICLES‘Note: Extraterritorial Subsidiary Jurisdiction’ (1987). 50 Law & Contemp Probs (pp. 71-93). https://doi.org/10.2307/1191664.
Briggs Adrian. (2002). ‘Public Policy in the Conflict of Laws: A Sword and a Shield?’ 6 Singapore Journal of International & Comparative Law (pp. 953-979). https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/singa6&div=30&id=&page= (Access 04/19/2022).
Burdeau Geneviève. (1997). ‘Legel d’avoirs étrangers’ 124 Journal du droit international 5, https://www.persee.fr/doc/afdi_0066-3085_1997_num_43_1_3490 (Access04/19/2022).
Carter Peter Basil. (1993). ‘The Role of Public Policy in English Private International Law’ 42 ICLQ 1, 4–5 (pp. 1-10). https://www.jstor.org/stable/761163 (Access 04/19/2022).
Chong Adeline. (2006). ‘The Public Policy and Mandatory Rules of Third Countries in International Contracts’. 2 Journal of Private International Law (pp. 27-70). https://doi.org/10.1080/17536235.2006.11424301.
Cranston Ross. (1987). ‘The Libyan Arab Foreign Bank Case’. Journal of Business Law 499 (pp. 499–504).
Enonchong Nelson. (1996). ‘Public Policy in the Conflict of Laws: A Chinese Wall around Little England?’. 45 ICLQ 633 (pp. 633-661). https://www.jstor.org/stable/760684, (Access 04/19/202).
Gavalda Christian. (1979). ‘L’efcacité juridique en France de l’executive order du président Carter “gelant” les avoirs ofciels iraniens?’. Gazette du Palais 18 décembre 1979 (pp. 2–3). https://www.gazette-du-palais.fr/12156479816187878 (Access 04/19/2022).
James Simon. (2008). ‘Rome I: Shall We Dance?’. 2 Law and Financial Markets Review (pp. 113-122). https://doi.org/10.1080/17521440.2008.11427949.
Lowe A Vaughan. (1988). ‘Extraterritorial Jurisdiction, The British Practice. 52 Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht (1988) 157–204, p. 179 (concerning the UK).
Lowe A Vaughan. (1988). ‘Freezing Foreign Bank Accounts – Libyan Arab Foreign Bank v Bankers Trust Co’. Lloyd’s Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly, 1 (pp. 38-45). https://books.google.com/books/about/Lloyd_s_Maritime_and_Commercial_Law_Quar.html?id=wYoTAAAAYAAJ, (Access 04/19/2022).
Mann Frederick Alexander. (1937). ‘Proper Law and Illegality in Private International Law’. John Fischer Williams and AD McNair (eds), 18 British Yearbook of International Law 97. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/byrint18&div=9&id=&page= (Access 04/19/2022).
Mann Frederick Alexander. (1958). ‘Illegality and the Conflict of Laws’. 21 Modern Law Review 180 (pp. 130-137). https://www.jstor.org/stable/i245536 (Access 04/19/2022).
Mann Frederick Alexander. (1971). ‘Conflict of Laws and Public Law’ in Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law – 1971, Vol. 132, Sijthoff. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1875-8096_pplrdc_A9789028600522_02 (Access 04/19/2022).
Richard Williams. (2013). ‘The Impact of Sanctions on Charterparty Operations’. 19 Journal of International Maritime Law 290 (pp. 3-17). https://www.lawtext.com/publication/the-journal-of-international-maritime-law/contents/volume-19/issue-4 (Access 04/19/2022).
Rutzke R. Corinne. (1988). ‘The Libyan Asset Freeze and its Application to Foreign Government Deposits in Overseas Branches of United States Banks: Libyan Arab Foreign Bank v Bankers Trust Co’. 3 American University International Law Review (pp. 241-282). https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1622&context=auilr (Access 04/19/2022).
Trevor C Hartley. (1998). ‘Mandatory Rules in International Contracts: The Common Law Approach’ in Collected Courses of The Hague Academy of International Law. Vol. 266 – 1997, Martinus Nijhoff. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1875-8096_pplrdc_A9789041105905_02, (Access 04/19/2022).
Urech Daniel. (1988). ‘Eurodollar Deposits and Freezing Orders: The Libyan Assets Case Revisited’. Journal of International Banking Law 269 (pp. 269–273). shorturl.at/diBS8 (Access 04/19/2022).
CASES
Boissevain v Weil [1950] AC 327 (Boissevain, 1950).
British Nylon Spinners v Imperial Chemical Industries [1955] Ch 37 (Nylon, 1955).
Ertel Bieber Co v Rio Tinto Co Ltd [1918] AC 260 (Ertel, 1918).
Euro-Diam Ltd v Bathurst [1987] 2 All ER (Bathurst, 1987).
Foster v Driscoll [1929] 1 KB 470 (Foster, 1929).
Ispahani v Bank Melli Iran (1997) The Times, 29 December, [1997] Lexis Citation 4800, [1997] All ER (D) 124 (Ispahani, 1997).
Kahler v Midland [1950] AC 24 (Kahler, 1950).
Kleinwort, Sons and Company v Ungarische Baumwolle Industrie Aktiengesellschaf and Another [1939] (Kelinwort, 1939).
Kuwait Airways Corporation v Iraqi Airways Company and Others [2002] UKHL (Kuwait, 2002).
Libyan Arab Foreign Bank v Bankers Trust [1989] QB (Bankers, 1989).
Libyan Arab Foreign Bank v Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co (No 2), QB (Com Ct) [1989] 1 Lloyd’s Law Reports (Manufacturers, 1989).
Libyan Arab Foreign Bank v Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co, QB (Com Ct) [1988] 2 Lloyd’s Law Reports (Manufacturers, 1988).
New Zealand v Ortiz and Others [1982] QB (Ortiz, 1982).
R v International Trustee for the Protection of Bondholders Aktiengesellschaf [1937] AC 500 (Bondholders, 1937).
Ralli Bros v Compania Naviera Sota y Aznar [1920] 2 KB 287 (Ralli, 1920).
Re-Claim by Helbert Wagg & Co Ltd [1956] 2 WLR 183, [1956] Ch 323. (Helbert, 1956)
Regazzoni v Sethia [1958] AC 301 HL (Regazzoni, 1958).
Zinovstenska Banka National Corporation v Frankman [1950] AC 57, 79 (Zinovstenska, 1950).
OTHER
Executive Order 12544 of 8 January 1986, FR 1235, 3 CFR, 1986 Comp.
Executive Order No 12170 of President Carter of 14 November 1979, 44 FR 65729.
Gabriel Felbermayr, Aleksandra Kirilakha, Constantinos Syropoulos, Erdal Yalcin, Yoto Yotov, The ‘Global Sanctions Data Base’: Mapping international sanction policies from 1950-2019, 18 May 2021.
President District Court, (1982), The Hague. 17, September 1982, 22 International Legal Materials.
| ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 135 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 166 |
||