IS THERE A FUTURE FOR STATE AGREEMENTS?

2005 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 221
Author(s):  
A.G. Castledine ◽  
M. Lamattina

State Agreements are agreements between private proponents and a State government which aim to facilitate the development of resources and processing projects and associated public infrastructure. State Agreements have been used extensively throughout Australia and each has been given varying levels of legislative recognition and effect, which in turn affects whether the rights and obligations arising under them have statutory or merely contractual effect. This ambiguity highlights the need to balance within State Agreements the private rights of the proponents with the public interest. The public interest critically involves third party rights to access infrastructure or services developed by proponents under the State Agreement. The introduction of National Competition Principles and regulatory regimes has affected the balance of these interests in favour of the public interest which has, in turn, led to a more stringent approach to State regulation under State Agreements. In particular, States are compelled through inter-governmental, federal and international competition and trade agreements to limit the extent to which it can negotiate its terms in a purely commercial way, embodying concessions in favour of proponents or preferences in favour of the State over other states or countries. Where a State Agreement expressly confers a benefit on third parties associated with access, third parties have successfully sought to enforce those benefits through the Courts, resulting in increased risks and costs for proponents that may not have been originally anticipated. Coupled with the political risks associated with changing governments and government policies, State Agreements, which have historically played a significant role in State development, are increasingly losing their ability to meet the commercial objectives of proponents.

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 937-939
Author(s):  
Renato Vrenčur ◽  
Michael Knaus ◽  
Matjaž Tratnik

Servitudes (easements) traditionally include the right to use foreign property. Specific types of servitudes are servitudes in the public interest. These are set up either in favour of the state, municipalities or operators of utilities. These servitudes are subject to some specific rules. For example, servitude in the public interest is established to carry out an undertaking for the operation of economic activity, i.e. to pursue public interests. It is needed for the duration of the use of public infrastructure; therefore, Article 227 of SPZ, under which a servitude may only be established for a limited duration of not more than thirty years, is not suitable for these servitudes. Furthermore, these servitudes are not independently transferable; they are transferred together with the right to operate economic public infrastructure. The authors discuss in particular the specific legal nature of a servitude in the public interest.


Author(s):  
Bradley Virgil Slade

 In this article the difference between public purpose and public interest in section 25(2) of the 1996 Constitution is considered. It is generally accepted that public purpose is a narrower category than public interest and that the distinction between public purpose and public interest does not make any practical difference. However, in this contribution it is suggested that the difference between public purpose and public interest makes no practical difference only in cases where expropriated property is used by the state for the realisation of a particular purpose. The difference between public purpose and public interest becomes more important when a particular expropriation also involves a third party transfer, since it indicates the level of scrutiny that the courts should apply in determining the lawfulness of the expropriation. When property is expropriated and transferred to a third party for the realisation of a public purpose, such as building and managing electricity plants, the lawfulness of the expropriation is not easily questioned. As such, the application of a rationality test to determine the legitimacy of the expropriation is generally easy to accept. However, this lenient approach cannot be as easily accepted where an expropriation and third party transfer takes place in the public interest. Examples of third party transfers in the public interest include land reform, slum clearance and economic development. In the examples of land reform and slum clearance the expropriation and third party transfer is usually authorised in legislation or, as is the case with land reform in South Africa, the 1996 Constitution. Because (as in the land reform example) the expropriation and third party transfer is authorised by the Constitution and regulated by legislation, the application of a rationality test to determine the legitimacy is acceptable. However, the application of a rationality test where property is expropriated and transferred to third parties for broader purposes such as economic development is problematic, especially if there is no specific legislation authorising such expropriation. Although an expropriation involving a third party transfer for purposes of economic development may well be in the public interest because it can lead to the creation of employment opportunities, it is argued that in the absence of specific legislation that authorises both the expropriation and the transfer of the property to third parties, the justification for the expropriation and the transfer is not entirely clear. Therefore, in the absence of a clear legislative scheme authorising the expropriation and transfer of property to third parties for the purpose of economic development, which can be said to fall within a very broad interpretation of the public interest requirement in section 25(2), the courts should apply a stricter scrutiny in evaluating its legitimacy.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariya Mihaylova ◽  

The Bulgarian legislator is faced with the challenge and the need to re-evaluate its punitive policy to protect the normal functioning of the economic system. When regulating such a matter, it is necessary to look for a balance of values and interests, as on the one hand there is the public interest requiring a stable and workable economy and on the other hand the private interest requiring certain limits of the state regulation.


Author(s):  
Mariya Zinovievivna Masik

The article is devoted to the clarification of the peculiarities of risk management during the implementation of PPP projects. The author identifies a set of risks for a private partner, business risks of PPP projects and the main risks associated with the protests of the public, as well as public and international organizations. The typical risks of PPP projects are presented, including force majeure, political risks, profitability risks, operational, construction, financial risks, and the risk of default. The world experience of sharing risks between the partners is presented. Also named are the main methods for assessing the risks of PPP projects. It has been determined that the conditions on which the parties should reach agreement in order for the contract to be concluded are essential. Risk management can be implemented within the framework of the essential conditions for the allocation of risks. However, the provisions of the law provide for the allocation of only those risks identified by the results of an analysis of the effectiveness of the PPP project. Legislation does not directly determine how risks can be allocated to the risks identified during the pre-contract negotiations (or even at a later stage), but not taken into account in the analysis of efficiency. For example, suggestions on the terms of the partnership agreement as part of the bidding proposal may include suggestions on risk management mechanisms. There are no definite and can not be fully defined possible ways of managing risks in view of their specificity for a particular project. For this purpose, it is advisable to provide for a period of familiarization with the draft tender documentation and the possibility of making changes to it based on the findings received from potential contestants. It is also advisable to foresee cases in which it is possible to review certain terms of the contract without a competition. It is substantiated that the law does not restrict the possibility of foreseeing specific terms of an agreement on the implementation of the PPP project or to conclude additional (auxiliary) contractual instruments (for example, an investment agreement). At the same time, when laying down conditions not provided for by law, it is necessary to take into account the scope of competence of the state partner. Also, in order to ensure the principle of equality of conditions, the state partner should provide such additional conditions in the tender documentation.


2009 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 483-501

The President (Mr R. S. Bowie, F.F.A.): Tonight's topic is ‘100 years of state pension: — learning from the past’. I am reminded of the expression: why are the bankers so keen to find new ways of losing money when the old ways seem to have worked perfectly well!The state pension has been going in a recognisable form for only 100 years and only for the last 60 as a universal pension; and only for the last 30 years in the form that we all might recognise today.If the Actuarial Profession can bring value to something from the past, it is to bring a perspective and a context to it so that we can learn from it. In this way, the Profession can create an informed climate within which public debate on matters of public interest can take place. As you will all know, the Financial Reporting Council are pressing the Profession hard to give tangible evidence of its commitment to the public interest, and this book falls into that category, creating an informed background for debate on a matter of huge public interest.


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Che Ku Hisam Che Ku Kassim ◽  
Noor Liza Adnan ◽  
Roziani Ali

Purpose Because of the heightened environmental awareness of the public, local governments (LGs) are being pressured to improve on the extent and quality of environmental disclosures (EDs) provided in an array of reporting media. The lack of an accounting tool to identify, measure and report EDs has propelled the infusion of environmental management accounting (EMA) to support the reporting practices. This paper aims to examine the institutional pressures influencing EMA adoption by Malaysian LGs. Design/methodology/approach Using the consensus approach, a self-administered questionnaire survey is conducted on accountants in LGs in Peninsular Malaysia. The items in the questionnaire are based on the findings of prior studies on EMA adoption. Findings The results suggest that coercive isomorphism from the state government is perceived to be the influential institutional factor placing intense pressures on LGs to adopt EMA. Research limitations/implications The results solidify the potential role of the state government in any public policy changes which could further stimulate and promote the adoption of EMA. Originality/value Insufficient empirical evidence on the adoption of EMA in LGs within a developing country’s perspective contributes to a limited understanding on the development of environmental-related practices in different economic stages and environment as well as within the public sector’s perspective.


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1859
Author(s):  
Yoki Kurniawan ◽  
Hanafi Tanawijaya

Notary is a position or ordinary we call as general officials appointed by the State and work to serve the public interest. Not only that, a notary also in carrying out its duties and authority must comply fully with the prevailing laws and regulations in Indonesia. Each position certainly has an ethics in the profession which is called a code of ethics, as well as a notary who has a code of ethics in his profession. But out there masi no notaries who violate the code of ethics as mentioned in the law, In accordance with the title of the author of the adopted method of research used is the normative research method supported by interviews that are expected to help answer the problems of this study. The authors conducted interviews with the supervisory board, notaries, and legal experts. In this case the notary has been declared guilty by the Regional Supervisory Board (MPD) and will proceed the case to the level of sanction by the Regional Supervisory Board (MPW) and after receiving the sanction it will proceed to the next level of Central Assembly (MPP) to be sanctioned which has been granted by the level of the Regional Supervisory Board (MPW).


2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elfrida R Gultom

The objective of Busway development is to provide transportation services faster, safer, comfortable, and affordable for people in Jakarta. Ticket prices are subsidized by the local government busway. Busway given special line, however could not be separated from the accident. In a carriage, in the event of an accident then apply provisions of Law No. 22 of 2009 on Traffic and Transportation. If there is a loss that hit the third party then setting responsibilities Public Service Agency TransJakarta Busway to third parties refer to the provisions of Article 194 paragraph (1) which determines that the public transport companies are not responsible for any losses suffered by third parties, unless the third party may prove that the loss is caused by the fault of public transport company. Under these provisions, if the third party wants to sue for damages, ketigalah party must prove the fault of the carrier, the claim is based on the basis of tort or on the basis of error set forth in Article 1365 of the Civil Code which stipulates that any action unlawfully harming others, require the person who carries the loss offset. Keywords: transport, the responsibility of the carrier, a third party, transport law


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document