Show Me the Money: Enforcing Original Jurisdiction Judgments of the Caribbean Court of Justice

2016 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 113-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
RIA MOHAMMED-DAVIDSON
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Single Market ◽  
The State ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
The Caribbean ◽  
Caribbean Court Of Justice ◽  
New York Convention

AbstractThis article examines the challenges surrounding the enforcement of decisions of international courts, using the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) as the fulcrum of the analysis. When sitting in its original jurisdiction, the CCJ adjudicates claims arising from the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas and the operation of the Caribbean Single Market and Economy. However, there is no clear route for the enforcement of original jurisdiction decisions. The Agreement Establishing the CCJ leaves the issue of enforcement to the states themselves, who in turn have either failed to enact enforcement legislation or have provided for enforcement to be carried out ‘in like manner’ as the decisions of domestic courts. This phraseology raises the spectre of the Crown Proceedings Act and its legislative progeny which bar the pursuit of enforcement proceedings against the state. Several solutions to this enforcement conundrum are discussed, ranging from a regional enforcement treaty, akin to the New York Convention, to enforcement at common law using the Fick case, with the merits and demerits of each examined in turn.

RESILIENCE TECHNIQUES OF INTERNATIONAL COURTS IN TIMES OF RESISTANCE TO INTERNATIONAL LAW

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-32
Author(s):  
Salvatore Caserta ◽  
Pola Cebulak
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Land Rights ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Indigenous Groups ◽  
The Caribbean ◽  
Caribbean Court Of Justice

Abstract International courts are increasingly called upon to adjudicate socially divisive disputes. They are therefore exposed to a heightened risk of backlash that questions their authority and impedes the implementation of their judgments. This article puts forward an analytical framework for mapping the resilience techniques used by international courts to counter this growing resistance. Case studies involve the Court of Justice of the European Union, which has been cautious in its stance regarding democratic backsliding in Hungary and Poland, and the Caribbean Court of Justice, which has engaged in legal diplomacy while adjudicating both on the land rights of indigenous groups and on Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Queer and Intersex (LGBTQI) rights. It is argued that, in order to effectively avoid and mitigate backlash, international courts should deploy resilience techniques that go beyond merely exercising their judicial function. The successful deployment of resilience techniques can allow international courts to become significant actors in global governance during a time of crisis for the international liberal order.

Regional Integration through Law and International Courts – the Interplay between De Jure and De Facto Supranationality in Central America and the Caribbean

2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 579-601 ◽  
Author(s):  
SALVATORE CASERTA
Keyword(s):  
Regional Integration ◽  
Central American ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Caribbean Community ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Societal Actors ◽  
The Caribbean ◽  
Caribbean Court Of Justice

AbstractThe article proposes an innovative theoretical framework outlining preconditions for Regional International Courts (RICs) to act as engines of supranationality in different institutional and socio-political contexts. In so doing, the article nuances the theoretical approaches to supranationality and supranational adjudication. The article focuses on the Central American Court of Justice (CACJ) and the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ). Both courts have been branded institutional copies of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU); they have even borrowed key jurisprudential principles from the Luxembourg Court with the goal of expanding the reach of Central American and Caribbean Community Laws. Yet, both the CACJ and the CCJ have thus far failed to foster supranationality in their respective systems. This is because the conditions allowing RICs to become engines of integration lie, for the most part, beyond the direct control of the judges, most notably, with other institutional, political, and societal actors, such as national judges, regional organs, legal and political elites, as well as academics. The article thus suggests that RICs can become engines of supranationality only to the extent to which they are supported by a set of institutional, political, and societal pre-conditions allowing for the concrete enforcement of the rulings of the RIC at the regional and national levels.

CARICOM and its Court of Justice

2008 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 334-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Derek O'Brien ◽  
S. Foadi
Keyword(s):  
Regional Integration ◽  
Institutional Structure ◽  
Single Market ◽  
Caribbean Community ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Caribbean ◽  
Caribbean Court Of Justice

The Caribbean Court of Justice, which was inaugurated in April 2005, is possessed of both an appellate and an original jurisdiction. In its original jurisdiction the Court is vested with a compulsory and exclusive power to interpret and apply the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas which establishes the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Single Market and Economy. This paper explores the Court's original jurisdiction and the role that it could play in promoting regional integration, taking account of the region's history and the institutional structure within which it will be expected to function.

scholarly journals Judicial diplomacy: International courts and legitimation

2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-84
Author(s):  
Theresa Squatrito
Keyword(s):  
Case Studies ◽  
International Institutions ◽  
Public Officials ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Institutional Legitimacy ◽  
The Public ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Caribbean ◽  
Caribbean Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Training

AbstractObservers of international courts (ICs) note that several ICs carry out a broad range of non-judicial activities, ranging from legal training workshops and public seminars to visits with public officials. Despite the growing prominence of these activities, they have received little attention from scholars. Seeking to fill this gap, this article examines these activities as a form of ‘judicial diplomacy’, asking how and why ICs employ judicial diplomacy. The article argues that ICs use judicial diplomacy as a means of legitimation. They seek to boost institutional legitimacy through their judicial diplomacy by targeting the public and communicating norm-referential narratives about their processes and outcomes. This argument bears out in case studies on the judicial diplomacy of the African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights and the Caribbean Court of Justice. Both courts are shown to have judicial diplomacy that is public-oriented and people-centred. This argument has important implications for literature on international courts and the legitimacy of international institutions.

scholarly journals The Appellate Jurisdiction of the Caribbean Court of Justice

2020 ◽  
pp. 502-528
Author(s):  
Stephen Vasciannie
Keyword(s):  
Single Market ◽  
The Other ◽  
Privy Council ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Considerable Debate ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Caribbean ◽  
Caribbean Court Of Justice ◽  
British Colonies ◽  
Court Of Appeal

Various Caribbean countries have established the Caribbean Court of Justice, and have taken steps to ensure its viability. The Court has two jurisdictions. One of these—the Original Jurisdiction—pertains to disputes arising under the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas, the constituent treaty of the Caribbean Single Market and Economy. The other jurisdiction—the Appellate Jurisdiction—was intended from the outset to allow the Caribbean Court of Justice to serve as the final court of appeal for all Caribbean countries. The Appellate Jurisdiction, which forms the basis of this chapter, has been the subject of considerable debate. To date, only four Caribbean countries—Barbados, Guyana, Belize and Dominica—have entrusted their final appeals to the new court, with most former British colonies in the region retaining the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council for final appeals. What have been the main elements in the long and circuitous debate concerning the Appellate Jurisdiction of the Court? Why have some Caribbean States opted to retain appeals to the Privy Council? And what are the prospects concerning the Appellate Jurisdiction? The chapter considers these issues in light of the passage of more than a decade and a half since Caribbean States signed the Agreement Establishing the Caribbean Court of Justice.

The Caribbean Court of Justice

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Salvatore Caserta ◽  
Mikael Rask Madsen
Keyword(s):  
Privy Council ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Community Law ◽  
Caribbean Community ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Sociopolitical Context ◽  
The Caribbean ◽  
Caribbean Court Of Justice ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
Court Of Appeal

This chapter analyzes the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), the creation of which was regarded as the culmination of the Caribbean’s long and protracted process toward independence from its former colonizers. Formally, the CCJ was instantaneously empowered to hear cases involving Caribbean Community law (Community law). The CCJ was also empowered to replace the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) in London—a last court of appeal for civil and criminal cases from the Caribbean and the most visible remnant of the British Empire’s former rule. The CCJ’s unique double jurisdiction—original over Community law and appellate over other civil and criminal matters—underscores the complex sociopolitical context and transformation of which it is a part. Ultimately, the CCJ’s growing authority has increasingly made the Court the institutional intersection for the convergence of these two different paths toward establishing the Caribbean as a legally integrated regional unity.

International Courts in Latin America and the Caribbean

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Salvatore Caserta
Keyword(s):  
Latin American ◽  
Decisive Role ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Science Literature ◽  
Regional Politics ◽  
Regional Economic ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Caribbean ◽  
Caribbean Court Of Justice ◽  
Latin American And Caribbean

The book provides the first in-depth and empirically grounded analysis on the foundations and trajectories of gaining authority of the four Latin American and Caribbean regional economic courts: the Central American Court of Justice (CACJ), the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), the Andean Tribunal of Justice (ATJ), and the Mercosur Permanent Review Court (PRC). While these courts were, on their terms, established to build common markets and to enforce trade liberalization, they have often developed bodies of jurisprudence in domains often not directly associated with regional economic integration. The CCJ has been most successful in the area of human and fundamental rights; the CACJ has addressed issues related to the enforcement of the rule of law in national legal arenas and long-standing border disputes between the countries of the region; the ATJ is an island of effective adjudication on intellectual property issues; and the PRC has significantly struggled to receive a significant number of cases to rule upon all together. The particular trajectories of the four Latin American and Caribbean Regional Economic Courts (RECs) suggest that there is no universal formula for success for these institutions and that their operational path is not necessarily a function of their formally delegated competences and/or of the will of the Member States, as it is often argued in mainstream legal and political science literature. Rather, local socio-political contextual factors—such as the historical legacies of a region, the interests and dynamics of socialization of legally and politically situated actors, the nature of national and regional politics, and legal culture—often play a far more decisive role in influencing the direction of RECs during and after their establishment.

Part 2 National and Regional Reports, Part 2.2 Asia: Coordinated by Yuko Nishitani and Béligh Elbalti, 35 Singapore: Singaporean Perspectives on the Hague Principles

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yeo Tiong Min
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
International Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Party Autonomy ◽  
Important Principle ◽  
Settlement Agreements ◽  
The Hague ◽  
Model Law ◽  
New York Convention

This chapter describes Singaporean perspectives on the Hague Principles. Party autonomy is recognized as a very important principle in the private international law of Singapore. The primacy given to the role of party autonomy is evidenced by the adoption of the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law for international arbitration, the adoption of the Convention on Choice of Court Agreements for international litigation, and the palpable support of the UNCITRAL Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation. Most of private international law in Singapore is sourced in judge-made law. In the absence of direct Singapore authority, Singapore courts have traditionally looked to English case law for guidance, but increasingly, the courts have looked to the laws of other jurisdictions, and indeed international instruments which do not have binding force in Singapore law. Given the level of sophistication of existing common law contract choice of law rules, it is unlikely that Singapore will engage in radical law reform. However, it is likely that the Singapore courts will continue to look to the Hague Principles for guidance in areas where the common law is unclear or where there is a gap or strong imperative for change.

The Challenged and Challenging De Facto Authority of the Central American Court of Justice at the Intersection of Pacification, International Law, and Regionalism

2020 ◽  
pp. 178-213
Author(s):  
Salvatore Caserta
Keyword(s):  
Early Years ◽  
Central American ◽  
Territorial Disputes ◽  
National Politics ◽  
Integration System ◽  
Member States ◽  
Community Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Caribbean ◽  
Caribbean Court Of Justice

This chapter deals with the trajectory of gaining de facto authority of the Central American Court of Justice (CACJ), showing how, different from the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), this Court has thus far failed to leave a significant mark in its operational context. In its early years, the Court fared rather well, especially in terms of its capacity to build a system of community law and to address some institutional difficulties of the Central American Integration System (SICA). However, when the Court became involved with several highly political disputes (i.e. a political clash between two former Nicaraguan Presidents and some territorial disputes among its Member States) in the early 2000s, it encountered strong resistance from several actors in its context of operation. As in the analysis of the CCJ, this chapter explains the fluctuation of the CACJ’s authority by looking at the role played by various contextual factors such as the institutional conflicts between the various organs of Central American integration, the highly polarised national politics of some of the Court’s Member States, and the divergent professional interests of the Central American legal elites.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document