Suchergebnisse

The financial crisis of 2007-08 saw a marked increase in global shipping disputes that is still being felt today. In recent decades, arbitration has emerged as the dominant choice of dispute resolution in the global shipping industry, with the establishment of major maritime arbitration centres in London and New York, and the recent emergence of new centres such as Singapore and China. At the same time, the immense advances that have been made and continue to be made in engineering, technology, and communications have led to the emergence of innumerable new trade practices, common understandings, and usages within which goods are carried by sea across the world, but which, because of the widespread use of alternative fora for dispute resolution, may be invisible to and unrecognized by domestic laws. This book asks: What are the implications of widespread use of arbitration for the continued development of shipping law? Are national laws on shipping destined to become ossified and obsolete? Is a new lex maritima emerging? And, most importantly, what is the role of the arbitral process in the evolution of shipping law? --Book jacket

One effect of the financial crisis of 2007-2009 was to jump-start a focus on macroprudential supervision, a supervisory approach which adopts a bird's-eye view in assessing and addressing systemic threats to financial stability. In addition to the threats to the financial system posed by the financial reach and exposure of large systemically relevant corporations, threats can also come from broader financial activity such as the design and distribution of innovative financial products within financial markets. Thus, product intervention powers may be useful in the future to financial supervisors attempting to address systemic risk deriving from financial innovation and growth. The utility of product intervention can be demonstrated by using the catastrophe bond markets as a case study. Extreme climate-related events are increasing in magnitude and frequency as a result of climate change and consequent losses are likewise increasing. The need to transfer these risks is leading to a growth in demand for insurance and the demand is beginning to exceed the capacity of traditional insurance and reinsurance. This has led to a type of beneficial financial innovation—the creation of instruments which transfer these catastrophe risks to the capital markets. The prevalence of catastrophe bonds in the financial markets is therefore growing, with the number of issues increasing steadily year-on-year. On the back of this, a number of catastrophe-linked derivatives are beginning to be traded in the markets. This Article argues that a number of features of the design and distribution of these financial instruments may render them systemically relevant in the future. This is so particularly in view of the potential for significant common exposures to develop, which, should widespread and significant losses occur, may engender panic in the financial markets. It also argues that the right way to address these systemic risks may be through the exercise of product intervention powers rather than by other regulatory means. Accordingly, this Article assesses the extent to which such powers, derived from the laws of the United Kingdom and the European Union, can be exercised for the achievement of macroprudential goals. More broadly, it analyzes what lessons can be learned from this case study about product intervention as a macroprudential tool to prevent or mitigate the build-up of systemic risk to financial stability.