regulatory takings
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

93
(FIVE YEARS 5)

H-INDEX

7
(FIVE YEARS 0)

2021 ◽  
pp. 170-181
Author(s):  
W. Thomas Hawkins
Keyword(s):  


2021 ◽  
pp. 182-206
Author(s):  
W. Thomas Hawkins
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  


2021 ◽  
pp. 200-217
Author(s):  
Gerald A. Fisher




Zakon ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (12) ◽  
pp. 156-171
Author(s):  
A.А. Markelova ◽  
◽  
A.V. Karachun ◽  


2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (02) ◽  
pp. 473-498
Author(s):  
Cosmin Vraciu

AbstractWhen state regulations prevent owners from certain uses of their property, is this action of the state a taking of property which requires compensation? One way of answering this problem, within a framework viewing property as a bundle of rights, is to inquire into whether the incident of use is an essential element of the bundle making up the property. Given the difficulties with figuring out what is essential and what is not, I propose an alternative solution, which does not give up the bundle-of-rights framework, but which, while assuming all incidents to be equally essential, it concentrates, instead, upon the legal entitlements conveying those incidents. I begin by arguing that while the incident of possession may be expressed by a right to exclude, the incident of use is expressed by a Hohfeldian liberty, and then I consider the consequences of this argument for the question of regulatory takings. I argue that while the liberty to use does not render the incident of use meaningless (at least, insofar as regulation of property use is concerned), there is nonetheless a significant distinction between transgressing a right and transgressing a liberty, and this implies that what it takes for an infringement of the right to exclude to be translated into a taking of the (whole) property is less than what it takes for the infringement of the liberty to use to be translated into a taking of property. As I show in the paper, we can achieve this result either by means of an argument from ‘constitutional residue’ or by means of an argument from the specification of constitutional rights.



2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 406
Author(s):  
Mohammad Belayet Hossain

This article aims to analyse the jurisprudence developed by international courts and tribunals with regard to the standard of treatment of foreign investors, with particular focus on issues concerning expropriation. In doing so, it will analyse some of the standard-setting decisions and far-reaching implications of: the Iran-US Claims Tribunals, the International Court of Justice and the ICSID. It will also examine the recent trend in jurisprudence on the so-called regulatory takings of foreign investment. It will explore: (a) how the decisions of international courts and tribunals have ‘fleshed out’ the principles of the law of foreign investment on, inter alia, the definition of expropriation and nationalisation and determination of the quantum of compensation; (b) how the frontiers of expropriation have been extended to cover regulatory takings



2018 ◽  
Vol 26 ◽  
pp. 81-112
Author(s):  
Iljoong Kim ◽  
Hojun Lee
Keyword(s):  


2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-52
Author(s):  
Iljoong Kim ◽  
Jaewook Byeon ◽  
Sung-Kyu Park


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document