![]() ![]() This organizing principle, he explained, “is not a free-standing rule, but rather a standard that underpins and is manifested in more specific legal doctrines and may be given different weight in different situations”. Justice Kasirer at, confirmed ‘a general organizing principle of good faith, which means that “parties generally must perform their contractual duties honestly and reasonably and not capriciously or arbitrarily”. The court ruled that the termination was not an honest performance of the contract in breach of the good faith principle. The case concerned an alleged breach of contract in terminating an agreement which contained a termination provision, by knowingly misleading the other party that it would not be terminated. Good faith – an organizing principleĪ recent reminder of the application of the good faith doctrine is to be found in the Supreme Court of Canada decision rendered on 18 December 2020 in C.M. While the UK government expressed a desire for a “Canada style” agreement, neither the Comprehensive and Economic Trade Agreement between the EU and Canada nor the related Joint Interpretative Instrument contain such provisions. Judicial decisions are, of course, a source of international law (see Article 38(1)(d) of the ICJ Statute). Similarly, the absence of an international doctrine of binding precedent enshrined in article 59 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice is reproduced in Article COMPROV.13 (2). Lord Steyn said in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex p Adan 2 WLR 143 at 154E it is the “very alphabet of customary international law” and must be determined “untrammelled by notions of its national legal culture”. Article COMPROV.13 (2) asserts the principle of autonomous treaty meaning confirmed in the UK on many occasions by the highest courts. Article COMPROV.13 (Public international law) virtually parrots Article 31(1) of the Vienna Convention on treaty interpretation. For greater certainty, an interpretation of this Agreement or any supplementing agreement given by the courts of either Party shall not be binding on the courts of the other Party.Įven a cursory review of these express stipulations to give effect and to interpret the Agreement in good faith reveals a restatement of the customary international law of treaties as codified in Articles 26 and 27 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (Article COMPROV.3 ( Good faith)).For greater certainty, neither this Agreement nor any supplementing agreement establishes an obligation to interpret their provisions in accordance with the domestic law of either Party.The provisions of this Agreement and any supplementing agreement shall be interpreted in good faith in accordance with their ordinary meaning in their context and in light of the object and purpose of the agreement in accordance with customary rules of interpretation of public international law, including those codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, done at Vienna on.They shall take all appropriate measures, whether general or particular, to ensure the fulfilment of the obligations arising from this Agreement and from any supplementing agreement, and shall refrain from any measures which could jeopardise the attainment of the objectives of this Agreement or any supplementing agreement.Īrticle COMPROV.13: Public international law.The Parties shall, in full mutual respect and good faith, assist each other in carrying out tasks that flow from this Agreement and any supplementing agreement.What immediately caught my eye however, are general provisions and principles of treaty interpretation in Part One that are so exceptional, I set them out in full: Administrative cooperation in combating VAT fraud and mutual assistance in recovering tax claims follows existing EU law instruments. ![]() Part Two Title IX Chapter 5 enacts BEPS prohibitions on harmful tax competition. Social security has a measure of co-ordination based on EU law principles (Heading Four: Title I). ![]() Nonetheless, some familiar elements of EU law in the Agreement will likely have an effect on tax such as free movement of capital (Title IV). Double tax treaties are expressly excluded from most favoured nation treatment (Article SERVIN.2.4: 3(a)). There is no general non-discrimination provision. The Agreement does not seek to replicate many of the rights which UK citizens and businesses had under EU law. The newly concluded Trade and Cooperation Agreement between the EU and UK has limited provisions concerning taxation, but interesting provisions relevant to interpretation of treaties including good faith. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |