Search results for

The sale of state-owned assets needs an attentive and flexible approach, says Gabriela Anton of Vilau & Mitel

Foreign direct investment can be a key factor in a country's ability to achieve economic development, increase employment or increase exports. Attracting foreign investment is of special importance for countries like Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), whose transition from a socialist economy to a market economy has been disrupted by conflict. With awareness of this need, BiH is constantly trying to improve its business climate to attract foreign investors.

How Mifid affects trading across EU borders, particularly in Switzerland

Two cases have shown that Latin American politicians should expect cases to follow them

Neither courts nor judges can agree on how insider rules should be implemented

The new structures being used in the wake of Aaoifi comments on sukuk

The UK rules were rushed and should not be permanent. The US wasn't much better

Backroom drama of Chinese tenders

The recent history of public tenders governed by the State Tender Law has seen controversial developments in Turkey. These resulted in the enactment of a new system in 2002 that initiated a highly restrictive and cumbersome set of rules under the Public Tender Law and related regulations. Unfortunately, the new mandate merely covered the area of public tenders for purchase of goods and services by public institutions from real estate contractors and service providers. Consequently, the old regime established under the State Tender Law remained in force with respect to the sale, barter and leasing of the real property owned by the treasury or under state control, and for the establishment of easement rights on public properties (collectively the Tenders).

On June 4 2008, the Seoul High Court (Court) handed down a decision on a criminal case brought by the Prosecutor's Office concerning a leveraged buyout (LBO) transaction. This was the third and final decision after the case was taken to the Court by the Korean Supreme Court on two occasions. The heart of the issue was the question of when a director may be held liable for a breach of fiduciary duty in the context of approving financial arrangements commonly used in LBO transactions.