{"created":"2021-03-01T07:08:03.113373+00:00","id":47453,"links":{},"metadata":{"_buckets":{"deposit":"cac7a8a4-df3a-4ff2-bd24-eeb17a433d2c"},"_deposit":{"id":"47453","owners":[],"pid":{"revision_id":0,"type":"depid","value":"47453"},"status":"published"},"_oai":{"id":"oai:repository.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp:00047453","sets":["55:864:7522:7526","9:504:867:7524:7527"]},"item_4_alternative_title_1":{"attribute_name":"その他のタイトル","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_alternative_title":"The Essential Problem of Indirect Expropriation in International Law"}]},"item_4_biblio_info_7":{"attribute_name":"書誌情報","attribute_value_mlt":[{"bibliographicIssueDates":{"bibliographicIssueDate":"2017-03-17","bibliographicIssueDateType":"Issued"},"bibliographicIssueNumber":"1","bibliographicPageEnd":"126","bibliographicPageStart":"87","bibliographicVolumeNumber":"68","bibliographic_titles":[{"bibliographic_title":"社會科學研究"}]}]},"item_4_description_5":{"attribute_name":"抄録","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_description":"間接収用に関する問題はこれまで，補償が必要とされる間接収用と補償を必要としない国家の正当な規制を区別する基準として，国家による措置が投資家の財産権に与えた効果のみを考慮する「効果テスト」と，効果のみではなく措置の性質も考慮する「性質テスト」が対立関係にあるものと措定され議論されてきた．しかしながら，そのような両基準の元となった投資仲裁判断を分析すると，一律に正当な規制と間接収用の区別基準を論じているわけではなく，それぞれ異なった理論枠組みに依拠していることが明らかとなる．本稿では，判示において示されたそれぞれの理論枠組みを支持する論者の論考を整理することにより，国家がいかなる措置に対して補償あるいは賠償義務を負うのかを判断する基準を明らかにするために問われなければならない問題の本質を明らかにする．","subitem_description_type":"Abstract"},{"subitem_description":"Concerning indirect expropriation, there have been discussions on how to distinguish between compensable indirect expropriation and non-compensable legitimate regulation. Theoretical considerations have also been made about whether the “Sole Effect Doctrine” or the “Police-Power Doctrine” is a better criterion to distinguish between these two notions. However, on analyzing international investment arbitral decisions, apparently, these decisions do not mention the criterion that distinguishes legitimate regulations from indirect expropriation in all situations. Two types of theoretical frameworks are evident in these decisions. The aim of this article is to clarify and resolve this essential issue in indirect expropriation by analyzing recent articles on the topic that have dealt with these theoretical frameworks.","subitem_description_type":"Abstract"}]},"item_4_description_6":{"attribute_name":"内容記述","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_description":"特集　国際関係法研究動向レビュー","subitem_description_type":"Other"}]},"item_4_full_name_3":{"attribute_name":"著者別名","attribute_value_mlt":[{"nameIdentifiers":[{"nameIdentifier":"161211","nameIdentifierScheme":"WEKO"}],"names":[{"name":"SHINTANI, Satomi"}]}]},"item_4_publisher_20":{"attribute_name":"出版者","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_publisher":"東京大学社会科学研究所"}]},"item_4_select_14":{"attribute_name":"著者版フラグ","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_select_item":"publisher"}]},"item_4_source_id_10":{"attribute_name":"書誌レコードID","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_source_identifier":"AN00108966","subitem_source_identifier_type":"NCID"}]},"item_4_source_id_8":{"attribute_name":"ISSN","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_source_identifier":"2189-4256","subitem_source_identifier_type":"ISSN"}]},"item_4_text_21":{"attribute_name":"出版者別名","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_text_value":"Institute of Social Science, The University of Tokyo"}]},"item_4_text_4":{"attribute_name":"著者所属","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_text_value":"東京大学大学院総合文化研究科"}]},"item_creator":{"attribute_name":"著者","attribute_type":"creator","attribute_value_mlt":[{"creatorNames":[{"creatorName":"新谷, 里美"}],"nameIdentifiers":[{"nameIdentifier":"161210","nameIdentifierScheme":"WEKO"}]}]},"item_files":{"attribute_name":"ファイル情報","attribute_type":"file","attribute_value_mlt":[{"accessrole":"open_date","date":[{"dateType":"Available","dateValue":"2020-07-14"}],"displaytype":"detail","filename":"shk068001004.pdf","filesize":[{"value":"1.3 MB"}],"format":"application/pdf","licensetype":"license_note","mimetype":"application/pdf","url":{"label":"shk068001004.pdf","url":"https://repository.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp/record/47453/files/shk068001004.pdf"},"version_id":"f63e3657-871b-4bd5-992a-9f85528947ee"}]},"item_keyword":{"attribute_name":"キーワード","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_subject":"間接収用","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"規制措置","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"ポリス・パワーの行使","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"補償","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"賠償","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"}]},"item_language":{"attribute_name":"言語","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_language":"jpn"}]},"item_resource_type":{"attribute_name":"資源タイプ","attribute_value_mlt":[{"resourcetype":"departmental bulletin paper","resourceuri":"http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501"}]},"item_title":"国際法上の間接収用をめぐる問題の本質","item_titles":{"attribute_name":"タイトル","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_title":"国際法上の間接収用をめぐる問題の本質"}]},"item_type_id":"4","owner":"1","path":["7526","7527"],"pubdate":{"attribute_name":"公開日","attribute_value":"2017-06-19"},"publish_date":"2017-06-19","publish_status":"0","recid":"47453","relation_version_is_last":true,"title":["国際法上の間接収用をめぐる問題の本質"],"weko_creator_id":"1","weko_shared_id":null},"updated":"2022-12-19T04:20:54.178867+00:00"}