Linked Data API

Show Search Form

Search Results

147349
registered interest false more like this
date less than 2014-11-10more like thisremove minimum value filter
answering body
Department for Business, Innovation and Skills more like this
answering dept id 26 more like this
answering dept short name Business, Innovation and Skills more like this
answering dept sort name Business, Innovation and Skills more like this
hansard heading Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership more like this
house id 2 more like this
legislature
25277
pref label House of Lords more like this
question text To ask Her Majesty’s Government why the investor-state dispute settlement system in the proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership will not be dealt with by United Kingdom courts. more like this
tabling member printed
Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb more like this
uin HL2753 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2014-11-19more like thismore than 2014-11-19
answer text The Transatlantic Trade and Investment partnership (TTIP) will be an agreement with 28 EU countries and the US. In the case of the UK, it has over 90 existing bilateral investment treaties with other countries across the world, UK domestic courts and the UK legal system remain the main route for resolving the overwhelming majority of disputes that foreign investors may have with the actions of the UK Government. Investment protection provisions and Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) clauses in trade and investment treaties are nonetheless valued by investors for providing certainty and protection from discriminatory action by host governments. Well-formulated investment protection and ISDS provisions have the potential to encourage investment while placing effective safeguards on the Government’s ability to regulate in the public interest. The Government believes it is in the UK's interest to create modern investment provisions in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) to both encourage investment and create a potential model for future trade and investment agreements with other countries. As such, we would want the ISDS mechanism in TTIP to be in line with best practice, including the new The United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Rules on Transparency in Treaty-based Investor-State Arbitration.
answering member printed Lord Livingston of Parkhead more like this
question first answered
less than 2014-11-19T12:33:40.25Zmore like thismore than 2014-11-19T12:33:40.25Z
answering member
4278
label Biography information for Lord Livingston of Parkhead more like this
tabling member
4297
label Biography information for Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb more like this
147352
registered interest false more like this
date less than 2014-11-10more like thisremove minimum value filter
answering body
Department for Business, Innovation and Skills more like this
answering dept id 26 more like this
answering dept short name Business, Innovation and Skills more like this
answering dept sort name Business, Innovation and Skills more like this
hansard heading Copyright more like this
house id 2 more like this
legislature
25277
pref label House of Lords more like this
question text To ask Her Majesty’s Government what are their reasons for proposing an extended three-year transition period from April 2015 for the implementation of section 74 of the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013, in the light of the current extent of counterfeiting. more like this
tabling member printed
Lord Clement-Jones more like this
uin HL2756 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction false more like this
date of answer less than 2014-11-21more like thismore than 2014-11-21
answer text The Government’s reasons for proposing a three-year transition period for implementing s74 Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 are set out in its recent consultation which concluded on 27 October 2014 (https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/transitional-provisions-for-the-repeal-of-section-52-of-the-cdpa). This does not represent an extended transition period but the Government’s provisional judgement as to the shortest reasonable period, taking into account the needs of both right owners and those using the current law to trade lawfully. The Government is considering the evidence it received and will make its decision on transitional provisions in the light of this. Current items made under the aegis of s52 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 would not be considered counterfeits. Counterfeit products (i.e. goods which falsely carry the trade mark of a genuine brand without permission) are already subject to legal sanction under separate trade mark legislation. more like this
answering member printed Baroness Neville-Rolfe more like this
question first answered
less than 2014-11-21T13:06:54.63Zmore like thismore than 2014-11-21T13:06:54.63Z
answering member
4284
label Biography information for Baroness Neville-Rolfe more like this
tabling member
3396
label Biography information for Lord Clement-Jones more like this