1 Legal Status (Personality), 1.4 Arab Monetary Fund v Hashim and others , 21 February 1991, United Kingdom House of Lords, 85 ILR 1

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schmalenbach Kirsten
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
United Arab Emirates ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Director General ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Domestic Law

This article examines the question of what is the legal basis for granting foreign international organizations legal personality under the law of a state which is neither a party to the founding instrument nor the host state. In the considered case the House of Lords was faced with the task of deciding on the legal personality status of the Arab Monetary Fund (AMF) after the organization instituted fraud proceedings against a former Director General in the United Kingdom. As the founding treaty of the AMF had not been incorporated into UK law, the organization was not recognized under domestic law. The House of Lords took recourse to the federal decree of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) which had granted the AMF domestic legal personality.

1 Legal Status (Personality), 1.3 Maclaine Watson & Co. Ltd v International Tin Council , 26 October 1989, United Kingdom House of Lords, 81 ILR 670

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Palchetti Paolo
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
International Organization ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Domestic Law

This judgment constitutes one of the most authoritative precedents on the question concerning responsibility of members for acts of the organization. The House of Lords denied the existence of a rule of general international law according to which, in the absence of an express provision in the constitutive treaty excluding the responsibility of the members, they are responsible, jointly and severally, for the breach by the organization of its obligations to third parties. According to the House of Lords, the separate legal personality of an international organization precludes that the members can be held responsible, due to their membership, for the conduct of the organization. The judgment also addresses the question of whether the effects stemming from the possession of a separate legal personality have to be determined by reference to international law or by reference to the domestic law of the forum state.

The Courts and the Executive: Four House of Lords Decisions

1977 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 255-283 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip Allott
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
House Of Lords

The purpose of the present study is to consider the constitutional significance of four House of Lords decisions which raise fundamental questions about the legal status of the Executive branch of government in the United Kingdom and its relationship to the courts. The decisions are those in: Burmah Oil Co. Ltd. v. Lord Advocate [1965] A.C. 75; [1964] 2 All E.R. 348; Carl Zeiss Stiftung v. Rayner & Keeler Ltd. (No. 2) [1967] 1 A.C. 853; [1966] 2 All E.R. 536; Conway v. Rimmer [1968] A.C. 910; [1968] 1 All E.R. 874; Nissan v. Attorney-General [1970] A.C. 179; [1969] 1 All E.R. 629.

International Organizations and Foreign States: Participants in Civil Law Relations in Russia

2004 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-34
Author(s):  
Vladimir Kanachevskii
Keyword(s):  
International Organizations ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
International Organization ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
Domestic Legislation ◽  
Characteristic Features ◽  
Domestic Law

AbstractThe author examines the legal status of international organizations and foreign states in trade and commerce in the Russian Federation. The specifi c issues which are touched upon by the author include general problems of the participation of public entities—such as international organizations as legal persons and the immunity of foreign states and international organizations—in civil law relations. The author concludes that domestic legislation should not be considered to be the only source of law for regulating private international relations involving states; practice illustrates that international treaties are also a source of such rules and regulations. Special attention in this article is devoted to characteristic features of the legal personality of international organizations, the sources of law regulating relations in which international organizations participate, the role of domestic law and internal rules of international organization itself, the various aspects of the legal capacity of international organizations as subjects of Russian civil law including agreements involving international organizations, the legal status of their separate divisions, issues relating to the property rights of international organization, and the civil law status of representatives of foreign states attached to international organizations (and their civil servants). The legal base for this research is formed by international treaties, the charters and internal rules of international organizations, and rules of Russian civil legislation as well as decisions of Russian and international judicial bodies. By way of conclusion, the author postulates that it is wise for domestic (and foreign) natural and legal persons, which enter into relations with the international organizations and foreign states, to take into consideration the specifi c nature of the above-mentioned subjects. In practice, this may result in dismissal of a plaintiff 's claim in a RF court where the defendant is an international organization or foreign state. It may thereby be impossible to hold such an organization or state civilly liable (without its consent) for breaching a contractual undertaking.

scholarly journals BLACK V. CHRÉTIEN AND THE CONTROL OF THE ROYAL PREROGATIVE

2011 ◽  
Vol 12 (1, 2 & 3) ◽  
pp. 2002
Author(s):  
Noel Cox
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
New Model ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
House Of Lords

Conrad Black, a prominent publisher and businessman in both Canada and the United Kingdom, submitted his name for one of the peerages to be created for the new-model House of Lords following the House of Lords Act 1999.1 The rights and duties of peers depend entirely upon custom.2 The principal legal distinction of British peers is — or was — their right to sit and vote in Parliament.3 Not all peers however were Lords of Parliament (principally the Irish peers not also possessing another peerage entitling them to a seat), and some Lords of Parliament, the bishops, are not peers.4 Essentially, Black was seeking, and had been promised, a seat in the upper house of the British Parliament.

Bioethics after Brexit: An opportunity to rationalize bioethics governance in the United Kingdom

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 135-156
Author(s):  
Jonathan Montgomery
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
European Region ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Institutions ◽  
Strategic Approach ◽  
European Values ◽  
Relationship Of

This article considers the shape of bioethics governance in Europe, noting the interplay between the institutions and laws of the Union and those of the Council of Europe. It reviews the structures of UK bioethics governance and identifies weaknesses that Brexit provides an opportunity to address. It notes the ambiguous relationship of UK bioethicists with European institutions and discusses the importance of soft power. It explores what the United Kingdom should do to maintain its influence. It advocates, first, improved coordination of governance organizations within the United Kingdom. Second, a more strategic approach to ‘soft power’ and UK involvement with international organizations, both within the European region and more widely. Finally, it proposes that the United Kingdom become a signatory to the Oviedo Convention in order to consolidate its connections with European values. These steps are suggested as mitigation for the loss of influence that Brexit might otherwise bring.

scholarly journals Control Over Personal Information in the Database Era

2009 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 322-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Andrejevic
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Personal Information ◽  
The State ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
House Of Lords

In February 2009 the House of Lords Constitutional Committee in the United Kingdom published the report Surveillance: Citizens and the State. Some have hailed this as a landmark document. The following is one of four commentaries that the editors of Surveillance & Society solicited in response to the report.

scholarly journals Drivers for Internationalization in Georgian Higher Education

2020 ◽  
pp. 91-104
Author(s):  
Pusa Nastase
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Web Sites ◽  
Student Mobility ◽  
Governmental Agencies ◽  
Export Strategy ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Almost Everywhere ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Institutional Expansion

Abstract Internationalization of higher education has been on the rise almost everywhere in Europe for the past two decades, from countries like the United Kingdom that have put higher education at the heart of their export strategy (An overview of the higher education exports and their value to the United Kingdom economy is provided by the debate on 19 July 2018 in the House of Lords available at https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/lln-2018-0079/.) to countries in Eastern Europe which are relatively active in student mobility but less internationalized in other areas (faculty profiles, research outputs, institutional expansion abroad). However, as a result of many factors, including an unprecedented number of European students benefitting from free and quality higher education available in other countries, and the strengthening of economic nationalism, we see a refocus in internationalization in many Western countries. This study investigates the drivers of internationalization in Georgian universities. Data was collected through interviews with Georgian ministry officials, heads of governmental agencies, rectors and faculty from Georgian universities in addition to documents and web sites analysis. This study presents an insight into national, institutional and individual drivers for internationalization in Georgia and the challenges experienced.

Dychotomiczny podział referendów dotyczących integracji europejskiej. Europejskie referenda bottom-up

2021 ◽  
Vol 3(164) ◽  
pp. 37-61
Author(s):  
Agnieszka Parol
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Integration Process ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Acquis Communautaire ◽  
Bottom Up ◽  
Common Category ◽  
The United Kingdom

One of the permanent instruments shaping the acquis communautaire are national referendums, which, although they have a different legal basis in each country, due to their scope, are combined into a common category of referendums on European integration (European referendums). Followed shortly by revision referendums, membership referendums were the first to appear in the integration process. The said referendums are part of the process of the top-down law Europeanisation. They do not, however, exhaust the catalogue of referendums on European integration, which also includes bottom-up Europeanisation national referendums. Because in each case of referendums it is possible to clearly indicate the type of Europeanisation (top-down, bottom-up) which they implement – it seems that this process may become the basis for the internal diversification of European referendums. The aim of the article is to propose a dichotomous division into European top-down and bottom-up referendums, and to analyse the categories of European bottom-up referendums. Six referendums organised after the TL’s entry into force were analysed. These are referendums that took place in: Denmark, Greece, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Hungary.

having relied on reasonable chastisement in the circumstances. The court concluded that there had been a violation of Art 3 on the basis that existing domestic law on the defence of lawful chastisement had failed to provide the applicant with adequate protection. Whilst the question of whether, in any given case, the treatment suffered by an applicant reached the minimum level of severity necessary to trigger the operation of Art 3 would depend on the circumstances, where the victim was a child the minimum threshold would be more easily attained. It should be noted that, whilst the court accepted that the United Kingdom could not be held responsible for the actions of a private individual, such as the applicant’s stepfather, it was responsible for a system of criminal law that allowed a person inflicting serious harm upon a child to be acquitted on the grounds that the harm was justifiable chastisement. There has been no legislative response to this decision, but the courts have attempted to alleviate the shortcomings of the domestic law by offering guidelines on the availability of the defence; see RvH (Reasonable Chastisement) (2001) The Times, 18 May. Where a parent raises the defence of lawful chastisement the jury ought to be directed to consider: (i) the nature and context of the defendant’s behaviour; (ii) the duration of that behaviour; (iii) the physical and mental consequences in respect of the child; (iv) the age and personal characteristics of the child; (v) the reasons given by the defendant for administering the punishment. Article 7: Non-retrospectivity

1996 ◽  
pp. 90-91
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Personal Characteristics ◽  
Minimum Level ◽  
Minimum Threshold ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Times ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
Private Individual

R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Brind [1991] UKHL 4, House of Lords

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Secretary Of State ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Home Department ◽  
Editorial Decisions

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Brind [1991] UKHL 4, House of Lords. The case considered whether the Secretary of State could restrict the editorial decisions of broadcasters as regards the way in which messages from spokespersons for proscribed organizations were broadcast. The United Kingdom was a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) when the case was heard, but the case also predates the passage of the Human Rights Act 1998. There is discussion of the legal position of the ECHR under the common law in the United Kingdom, and the concept of proportionality in United Kingdom’s domestic jurisprudence. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document