Foreign Relations and the Judiciary

2002 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 485-510 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence Collins

It is not generally appreciated that Francis Mann was not an international lawyer at all by training. His thesis at Berlin University was in company law. It was only after he had been in England for some time that he began to write about private international law,1 and his interest in public international law was developed as a result of his friendship with Sir Hersch Lauterpacht. It was not until 1943 that he published anything about public international law, and in that year he published a substantial article in two parts on the relationship between national law and international law, in which he built on the previous work on Judicial Aspects of Foreign Relations by Louis Jaffe2 and on acts of state by Sir William Holdsworth.3 Subsequently he came to make this subject his own, at least in England,4 where the subject has never attracted the attention which it has attracted in the United States.5

2008 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 151-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Hepp

James Brown Scott played a key role in the growth of public international law in the United States from the 1890s to the 1940s. While little remembered today, he was well-known among his contemporaries as a leading spokesman for a new and important discipline. Scott rose from obscure middle-class origins to occupy a prominent and influential place as an international lawyer who shared his legal expertise with seven presidents and ten secretaries of state. By examining his life we gain insight into the establishment of public international law as a discipline and on the era when lawyersqualawyers began to help shape American foreign policy.


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-37
Author(s):  
Carmen Tiburcio

The paper is intended to provide an overview of Private International Law in Brazil. With this purpose, it presents in broad lines the subject matters of the discipline, undertaking, whenever possible, comparisons with the contours given to it in the United States. In sum, the text deals with the acquisition of Brazilian nationality, the status of aliens, the determination of the applicable legislation to legal relationships with international connections – which includes the exam of Brazilian connecting rules and principles of Private International Law – and the exercise of Brazilian jurisdiction.


1907 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
George B. Davis

International law owes much to American judges and to American jurists. The list of those who have contributed to its advancement is not short and includes the names of Marshall, Story and Field, Kent, Wheaton, with his able commentators, Dana and Lawrence, Halleck and Lieber and, among recent writer’s, Taylor, Moore and Snow. Although his name is not connected with a general treatise on the subject of public international law, it may be doubted whether any of his fellow-workers in that field have rendered a more important service to humanity and to international good neighborhood, than has Dr. Francis Lieber in his memorable “Instructions for the Government of the Armies of the United States in the Field.”


1989 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 155-166
Author(s):  
Eric P. A. Keyzer ◽  
Marion Th. Nijhuis

The Hague Evidence Convention – officially the Convention On the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters – was realized in 1970 by The Hague Conference for Private International Law. The Convention gave rise to several differences of opinion between Europe and the United States. The European countries and the United States, in particular, disagree about the (optional or obligatory) character of the convention-procedures. This article will, among other things, deal with the consequences to be expected in The Netherlands of a recent American Supreme Court judgement on this issue: The Aérospatiale case1. The subject will be treated in five sections: 1.The Hague Evidence Convention; 2.The Netherlands and The Hague Evidence Convention; 3.Consequences of the Aérospatiale-case for The Netherlands; 4.Consequences of the Aérospatiale-case for Dutch parties involved in litigation in the UnitedStates; 5.Aérospatiale and conclusion.


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-37
Author(s):  
Carmen Tiburcio

The paper is intended to provide an overview of Private International Law in Brazil. With this purpose, it presents in broad lines the subject matters of the discipline, undertaking, whenever possible, comparisons with the contours given to it in the United States. In sum, the text deals with the acquisition of Brazilian nationality, the status of aliens, the determination of the applicable legislation to legal relationships with international connections – which includes the exam of Brazilian connecting rules and principles of Private International Law – and the exercise of Brazilian jurisdiction.


2020 ◽  
pp. 335-358
Author(s):  
Pamela K. Bookman

This chapter discusses the debate that the Fourth Restatement of Foreign Relations Law of the United States has sparked regarding the status of adjudicative jurisdiction under public international law. The Fourth Restatement has received considerable attention for its conclusion that adjudicative jurisdiction is not a concern of public international law. But exercises of adjudicative jurisdiction around the world are not static. Innovations and expansions of international adjudication in courts around the world are in process and looming on the horizon. This chapter surveys these developments and considers whether they could lead the next Restatement to alter its position on adjudicative jurisdiction. It also evaluates how these developments could translate into state practice and expressions of opinio juris that might affect the international law status of adjudicative jurisdiction.


AJIL Unbound ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 111 ◽  
pp. 336-340
Author(s):  
Congyan Cai

Curtis Bradley has observed that, apart from in the United States, foreign relations law generally has not been treated as a separate academic field, but that this situation is starting to change. This observation can also find evidence in China. In March 2016, I hosted a conference on “Chinese Foreign Relations Law: A New Agenda” at Xiamen University School of Law, where I am a faculty member. This is the first conference engaging with this field in China. Also in 2016, a Chinese professor of private international law published the first article discussing Chinese foreign relations law in a general way, the main argument of which is that foreign relations law should be a component of the “rule of law” in China.


2021 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 573-579
Author(s):  
Piotr Rodziewicz

Although government recognition is a legal concept of public international law, it interacts with other branches of law, including private international law and international civil procedure. According to the jurisprudence of British and American courts, unrecognized governments do not possess locus standi in civil proceedings in regard to matters which fall within the state dominium. In the mentioned jurisprudence, a doctrine has been formulated according to which judges are bound by the position of their state executive bodies in regard to foreign state and government recognition, which has direct influence on the locus standi of foreign states in the courts of Britain and the United States. The aim of this paper is to present the above rulings, as well as to analyze whether there are grounds for accepting the doctrine which follows from them in Polish civil litigation.


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-37
Author(s):  
Carmen Tiburcio

The paper is intended to provide an overview of Private International Law in Brazil. With this purpose, it presents in broad lines the subject matters of the discipline, undertaking, whenever possible, comparisons with the contours given to it in the United States. In sum, the text deals with the acquisition of Brazilian nationality, the status of aliens, the determination of the applicable legislation to legal relationships with international connections – which includes the exam of Brazilian connecting rules and principles of Private International Law – and the exercise of Brazilian jurisdiction.


2020 ◽  
pp. 303-318
Author(s):  
Austen Parrish

This chapter explores how the Fourth Restatement of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States charts a new, unexpected path in the area of adjudicatory jurisdiction. The Fourth Restatement breaks with common understandings to find that personal jurisdiction is not a concern of international law. It indicates that “with the significant exception of various forms of immunity, modern customary international law generally does not impose limits on jurisdiction to adjudicate.” The Fourth Restatement’s discussion of adjudicatory jurisdiction also appears to premise its conclusion on two unorthodox approaches to international law. First, it implies that fundamental structural limits of the international legal system can disappear unless states are vigilant in protesting illegal activity of other states. However, states are not required to persistently protest illegal activity, and it is far from clear that the absence of protests can nullify long-standing principles of sovereignty. Second, the Restatement appears to assume that states have unfettered authority absent a limiting customary rule. Yet international legal practice has not traditionally addressed jurisdictional questions that way.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document