000			02134nab a2200229 c 4500
999			_c146907 _d146907
003			ES-MaIEF
005			20230102125929.0
007			ta
008			221228t2022 ne ||||| |||| 00| 0|eng d
040			_aES-MaIEF _bspa _cES-MaIEF
100	1		_961495 _aBrown, Harriet
245		0	_aInterpretation of multi-lateral treaties _bThe purposive approach and multiple parties through the lens of the UK courts _c H. Brown & G. Jackson
500			_aResumen
520			_aIn this article the authors consider how to interpret the multilateral provisions in relation to tax administration such as the Common Reporting Standard (CRS), Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) and the Mandatory Disclosure Regime, the pace of adoption of which continues to accelerate. They discuss whether the pre-existing framework provided by the Vienna Convention on The Law of Treaties is either adequate or appropriate in its application to the interpretation of such multi-later instruments. In light of this analysis the authors consider what principles of interpretation are found in case law and whether the principles ennunciated in Fowler v. Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2021] 1 All ER 97, could be used to remedy any deficiency in the Vienna Rules. This includes an examination of the dangers of the use of commentary in the interpretation of multi-later instrument and the importance of principles that allow the interpretative tradition of the relevant jurisdiction to override commentary. Having examined these difficulties and the inadequacies in the modern interpretive code, they propose methods of approach to ease the interpretative issues created by multi-lateral instruments, including the possibility of an internal code of interpretation for such multi-lateral instruments.
650		4	_948608 _aTRATADOS INTERNACIONALES
650		4	_967061 _aCONVENIO MULTILATERAL
650		4	_967760 _aMODELO DE CONVENIO OCDE
650		4	_944303 _aFISCALIDAD INTERNACIONAL
700	1		_969925 _aJackson, Grahame R.
773	0		_9168618 _oOP 2141/2022/11 _tIntertax _w(IEF)55619 _x 0165-2826 _g v. 50, n. 11, November 2022, p. 766-781
942			_cART