Petroleum Business Review

Abstract The international chamber of commerce (ICC) created a generally accepted set of terms named INCOTERMS 2020 which provides that the risk of the loss of or damage to the goods passes from the seller to the buyer when the seller has fulfilled his obligation to deliver the goods. However, this rule is based on a false base, which causes numerous exceptions where the goods are delivered, but the risk remains on behalf of the seller. In this paper, we will prove that there is only one unexceptional factor which indicates whether the risk has passed through the other side or still remains with it; that factor is reaching the aim. The aim has a composite nature, and preparing the last part of that nature allows reaching the goal; this is the main reason for transferring the risk of the thing. Thus, when the buyer’s aim from the contract is fulfilled, the risk of the goods will be transferred to him or her, and when the seller’s aim from the contract is met, the risk of the price will be transferred to him or her. Generally, the aim or the cause of the obligations should be defined as the acquirement of the property and the possession of the thing which is peaceful and useful for enjoying with security. Hence, each term will be separately analyzed by the theory of the cause of the obligations in the civil law of France, and we will name this totally new theory which defines the goal as a composite nature the theory of the spirit level of the risk.




The international chamber of commerce (ICC) created a generally accepted set of terms named INCOTERMS 2020 which provides that the risk of the loss of or damage to the goods passes from the seller to the buyer when the seller has fulfilled his obligation to deliver the goods. However, this rule is based on a false base, which causes numerous exceptions where the goods are delivered, but the risk remains on behalf of the seller. In this paper, we will prove that there is only one unexceptional factor which indicates whether the risk has passed through the other side or still remains with it; that factor is reaching the aim. The aim has a composite nature, and preparing the last part of that nature allows reaching the goal; this is the main reason for transferring the risk of the thing. Thus, when the buyer’s aim from the contract is fulfilled, the risk of the goods will be transferred to him or her, and when the seller’s aim from the contract is met, the risk of the price will be transferred to him or her. Generally, the aim or the cause of the obligations should be defined as the acquirement of the property and the possession of the thing which is peaceful and useful for enjoying with security. Hence, each term will be separately analyzed by the theory of the cause of the obligations in the civil law of France, and we will name this totally new theory which defines the goal as a composite nature the theory of the spirit level of the risk.




 

Abstract Unlike many arbitrations, the arbitration procedure for price reviews in gas industry contracts is not based on allegations that one party has breached a contract or otherwise committed a legal wrong. Instead, arbitrators are asked to determine whether the economics of a contract has been changed in the market and thus should be adjusted; if so, a new price formula should be established. Due to the complexity of the revision of gas prices, the gas experts have significant role in these arbitrations. Regarding the role of gas experts, gas price arbitrations have specific nature. In this article, the nature of these arbitrations is examined to establish whether they are arbitration or expert determination as one of alternative dispute resolutions (ADR). Iran has the second proven natural gas resources worldwide and is the third natural gas producer in the world, so Iran–Turkey case will come under scrutiny in this article.

Abstract Foreign investment contracts are one of the major ways to absorb the technology in oil and gas industry. Studies show that governments and investing companies prefer to gain more profit and control economic resources and political influence by investing financially and technically in developing countries than to buy foreign technology and intellectual property rights directly. On the other hand, for developing countries, the sum of foreign capital and technology within a contract is a great opportunity for advancement provided that the technology transfer is chosen with due regard to the country’s needs, requirements, and economic future. In this work, after examining the relationship between investment and technology transfer and its various methods in oil and gas industry, we will analyze the constraints on and the barriers to technology transfer through foreign investment in developing countries, including Iran, and provide a solution. 

Abstract The purpose of this study is to compare the stringency of and compliance with environmental requirements in the upstream sector of oil and gas in law of Iran and the USA. This study is conducted using the mixed entanglement method (qualitative–quantitative). In the qualitative part, library studies are used. In the quantitative part, the studied society is a group of six professionals in the field of oil and gas, who filled out a questionnaire consisted of 34 questions prepared by the Worley Parsons[1] in a similar research approved by the jurisdictions of 10 countries. The questions are prepared by a team of experts with international experience. The components of stringency of and compliance with law during the phases of approval, operation, and closure of a hydrocarbon project are studied using the Delphi method. At the level of stringency, the environmental assessment in the US is carried out with human resources and costs 10 and 26 times more than those in Iran. The US, with 13 scores, is more stringent than Iran with 5 scores. In the project closure phase, Iran does not impose any obligations for rehabilitation and restoration. At the level of compliance, the construction environmental management plan (CEMP) is mandatory in both countries. In Iran, the list of violations and their consequences will not be published. The US regulatory mechanisms of restoration are an appropriate model. On the whole, Iran gains 29 scores, and the United States obtains 42 scores. The recommendations are based on these two scores.
[1]https://www.medicinehat.ca/home/showdocument?id=11659

Abstract International oil and gas investment disputes constitute an important part of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system. Investment arbitration which is regarded as a prevalent dispute settlement mechanism in this area has come under severe criticism since it creates huge costs, lengthens the process, and devastates the parties’ long-term investment relationship. In recent years, the possibility of applying alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and hybrid dispute settlement mechanisms has largely been discussed. Mediation-arbitration (Med-Arb) is one of the hybrid integrated dispute settlement mechanisms which embodies flexibility, nonjudicial, and negotiate-oriented benefits of mediation and the finality advantage of arbitration simultaneously in a single process. In this method, mediation is first attempted by the parties before arbitration could be started; if settlement is not reached during the mediation phase, the appointed neutral or mediator will then act as (an) independent arbitrator(s), will continue the case under the arbitration process, and will render a binding arbitration award. In this method, if parties reach an agreement during the first phase (mediation process), they will not incur huge costs of lengthy investment arbitration. In this method, even if the first stage (mediation process) fails, since it has further clarified and narrowed down the disputes, then the arbitration process will be less lengthy and proceed more efficiently. Moreover, both investors and host states in oil and gas investment area do have strong ambitions to maintain the investment relationships. These goals are achieved better via adopting Med-Arb proceedings. The most noted concerns in this method relates to the issue of the impartiality of the neutral (mediator in the first stage) who acts as an arbitrator at the next stage. In other words, it may be argued that the confidential information learned by the neutral from the parties in the mediation stage may seriously impact on his/her impartiality in the arbitration stage. This issue can be responded in light of respecting party autonomy principle which selects the Med-Arb clearly and correctly for dispute settlement. This approach is affirmed and proposed by the UNCITRAL model law on international commercial conciliation (2002) as well. Also, concerns regarding the enforcement of international agreements resulting from mediation have already been addressed in the United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation (Singapore Convention on Mediation), which has attained international acceptance by 51 state members so far.

Abstract Energy has been always the focus of attention since the establishment of the WTO.The significance of this issue was doubled when the major energy-producing countries states sought to join the WTO.To join the WTO,many energy-producing and energy-exporting states inevitably needed to modify and change their own laws.The adoption of a dual pricing policy by the applicant countries appears as one of the controversial issues in this regard.By determining lower energy prices for their domestic producers,the energy-rich countries provide them with a superior position relative to their international rivals.From the perspective of some energy-importing countries,such behaviors are seen as subsidizes.Iran as one of the largest energy-rich states,has been seeking about twenty years to join the WTO.Iran subsidizes its domestic producers to support its energy sector and infant industries.This article focused on examining the pricing policies,and in particular,the approach to determine the price of energy in Iran.In addition,we studied of the impact of the pricing method of the energy sector in Iran on the process of its accession to the WTO by a comparative evaluation of the accession process of the energy-producing countries such asRussia andSaudi Arabia to the WTO.Through studying the laws and regulations of the energy sector of Iran, one can realize that Iran has been distancing from DP in recent years and is striving to approach the price of its energy to the global price by benefiting fromthe experiences of the performance of the membercountries of the WTO aimed at accelerating the process of its accession to the WTO