The Global Community Yearbook of International Law and Jurisprudence 2019

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Original Research ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Global Community ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Global Law

The 2019 edition of the Global Community Yearbook of International Law and Jurisprudence both updates readers on the important work of long-standing international tribunals and introduces readers to more novel topics in international law. The Yearbook continues to provide expert coverage of the Court of Justice of the European Union and diverse tribunals from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to criminal tribunals such as the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (MICT), to international courts of human rights (ECtHR, IACtHR, ACtHPR), to economically based tribunals such as ICSID and the WTO Dispute Resolution panel. This edition contains original research articles on the development and analysis of the concept of global law and the views of the global law theorists such as: a judicial knowledge-sharing process as a tool for courts working together in a universal constitutional structure; the key insights emerging from the Global Environment Outlook-6, and the progress that has been made in international environmental law; the role of human rights treaty monitoring bodies in the international legal order; and an examination of the consequences of the UN Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration on international law. The Yearbook provides students, scholars, and practitioners alike a valuable combination of expert discussion and direct quotes from the court opinions to which that discussion relates, as well as an annual overview of the process of cross-fertilization between international courts and tribunals.

The Global Community Yearbook of International Law and Jurisprudence 2018

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Original Research ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Global Community ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
Global Law

The 2018 edition of The Global Community Yearbook of International Law and Jurisprudence both updates readers on the important work of long-standing international tribunals and introduces readers to more novel topics in international law. The Yearbook continues to provide expert coverage of the Court of Justice of the European Union and diverse tribunals from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to criminal tribunals such as the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, to economically based tribunals such as ICSID and the WTO Dispute settlement procedures. The contents of this part have been enriched with the inclusion of a new section devoted to the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), the oldest global institution for the settlement of international disputes. This edition contains original research articles on the development and analysis of the concept of global law and the views of the global law theorists such as: whether the Paris Declaration of 2017 and the Oslo Recommendation of 2018 deals with enhancing their institutions’ legitimacy; how to reconcile human rights, trade law, intellectual property, investment and health law with the WTO dispute settlement panel upholding Australia’s tobacco plain packaging measure; Israel’s acceptance of Palestinian statehood contingent upon prior Palestinian “demilitarization” is potentially contrary to pertinent international law; and a proposal to strengthen cooperation between the ECJ and National Courts in light of the failure of the dialogue between the ECJ and the Italian Constitutional Court on the interpretation of Article 325 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European union. The Yearbook provides students, scholars, and practitioners alike a valuable combination of expert discussion and direct quotes from the court opinions to which that discussion relates, as well as an annual overview of the process of cross-fertilization between international courts and tribunals.

The Global Community Yearbook of International Law and Jurisprudence 2017

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Original Research ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Economic Rights ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Global Law

The 2017 edition both updates readers on the important work of long-standing international tribunals and introduces readers to more novel topics in international law. The Yearbook has established itself as an authoritative resource for research and guidance on the jurisprudence of both UN-based tribunals and regional courts. The 2017 edition continues to provide expert coverage of the Court of Justice of the European Union and diverse tribunals from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to criminal tribunals such as the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, to economically based tribunals such as ICSID and the WTO Dispute Resolution panel. This edition contains original research articles on the development and analysis of the concept of global law and the views of the global law theorists. It also includes expert introductory essays by prominent scholars in the realm of international law, on topics as diverse and current as the erosion of the postwar liberal global order by national populism and the accompanying disorder in global politics, a bifurcated global nuclear order due to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty and the Nuclear Weapons Prohibition Treaty, and the expansion of the principle of no-impunity and its application to serious violations of social and economic rights. New to the 2017 edition, the author of the article in Recent Lines of Internationalist Thought will now talk about their own work as a Scholar/Judge. In addition, this edition memorializes the late M. Cherif Bassiouni. The Yearbook provides students, scholars, and practitioners alike a valuable combination of expert discussion and direct quotes from the court opinions to which that discussion relates, as well as an annual overview of the process of cross-fertilization between international courts and tribunals and a section focusing on the thought of leading international law scholars on the subject of the globalization.

THE GLOBAL COMMUNITY YEARBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND JURISPRUDENCE 2016

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Rich Diversity ◽  
Global Law ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

The 2016 edition updates readers on the important work of long-standing international tribunals and introduces readers to more novel topics in international law. The Yearbook has established itself as an authoritative resource for research and guidance on the jurisprudence of UN-based tribunals and regional courts. The 2016 edition continues to provide expert coverage of the EU Court of Justice and diverse tribunals from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to criminal tribunals such as the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, to economically based tribunals such as ICSID and the WTO Dispute Resolution panel, to human rights courts such as ECtHR and IACtHR. This edition contains original research articles on the development and analysis of the concept of global law and the views of the global law theorists, such as the Editorial focusing on a new remedy for the violation of the jus cogens principle concerning the imprescriptibility of torture. This edition also includes expert introductory essays by prominent scholars in the realm of international law, on topics as diverse and current as the role of the WTO’s Appellate Body in interpreting the TRIPS Agreement and an examination of the EU Court of Justice data protection framework in light of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Researchers will find detailed guidance on a rich diversity of legal topics, from an examination of the processes under which transnational criminal law norms have been adopted and the process under which these norms have been globally implemented, to the impact post-conviction DNA testing has had on the criminal justice system in the United States. This edition also provides students, scholars, and practitioners a valuable combination of expert discussion and direct quotes from the court opinions to which that discussion relates, as well as an annual overview of the process of cross-fertilization between international courts and tribunals and a section focusing on the thought of leading international law scholars on the subject of the globalization.

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.

scholarly journals The Phenomena of Fragmentation in the Legal Relations between the Council of Europe and the European Union

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Viktoriya Kuzma
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
European Continent ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Law

This article presents the current issues in the law of international organizations and contemporary international law in general. It is pointed out that the division of international law into branches and institutions, in order to ensure the effective legal regulation of new spheres of relations, led to the emergence of autonomous legal regimes, even within one region, namely on the European continent. To date, these include European Union law and Council of Europe law. It is emphasized the features of the established legal relations between the Council of Europe and the European Union at the present stage. It is determined that, along with close cooperation between regional organizations, there is a phenomenon of fragmentation, which is accompanied by the creation of two legal regimes within the same regional subsystem, proliferation of the international legal norms, institutions, spheres and conflicts of jurisdiction between the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union. It is revealed that some aspects of fragmentation can be observed from the moment of establishing relations between the Council of Europe and the European Union, up to the modern dynamics of the functioning of the system of law of international organizations, the law of international treaties, law of human rights. Areas and types of fragmentation in relations between international intergovernmental organizations of the European continent are distinguished. One way to overcome the consequences of fragmentation in the field of human rights is highlighted, namely through the accession of the European Union to the Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950. Considerable attention has also been paid to defragmentation, which is partly reflected in the participation of the European Union in the Council of Europe’s conventions by the applying «disconnection clause». It is determined that the legal relations established between an international intergovernmental organization of the traditional type and the integration association sui generis, the CoE and the EU, but with the presence of phenomenon of fragmentation in a close strategic partnership, do not diminish their joint contribution into the development of the law of international organizations and contemporary international law in general. Key words: defragmentation; European Union; European Court of Human Rights; Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950; conflict of jurisdictions; «disconnection clause»; Council of Europe; Court of Justice of the European Union; fragmentation; sui generis.

scholarly journals The role of international courts’ decisions in the system of sources of international financial law

2021 ◽  
pp. 254-272
Author(s):  
O. Vaitsekhovska ◽  
O. Chepel
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Current Case ◽  
Financial Flows ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Financial Issues

The paper deals with the analysis of the legal nature of international courts’ decisions and their impact on the international financial legal order. The author claims that decisions of international courts, creating no new international legal financial norms, act as an additional source of international financial law, having no autonomy, and in combination with other sources of international law, performs the following functions: 1) regulatory-prescriptive (via opinio juris of existing traditions in interstate practice in the financial sphere transforming them into international customary law); 2) regulatory-affirming (confirming the legal nature of the international agreement between the subjects of international financial legal relations which caused a disputable situation). The judicial practice on financial issues and specificity of functioning of such judicial institutions as the Permanent Court of International Justice, the International Court of Justice, the CIS Economic Court, the Court of Justice of the European Union, the Court of Justice of the Central African Economic and Monetary Community, etc. are examined. The features of the provisions of international agreements on financial issues regarding the procedure for resolving disputes between the parties of the agreement about its implementation are analyzed. The paper explores particularities of the origin and development of the idea of the creation of an international financial court. Amid modern processes of the rapid growth of the amount of cross-border financial flows in the context of globalization, which is the consequence of the implementation of numerous international financial agreements, the idea of creation of an international financial court, which was first suggested in 1935, due to the complexity of legal nature of interstate financial disputes, is an objective necessity. The following features intrinsic to decisions of international courts (including decisions on financial issues) have been identified: 1) locality (binding only on the parties involved in the case, and only in the current case); 2) situatedness and unprompted appearance; 3) impartiality (due to the judges’ lack of political interest); 4) authority (international courts include generally recognized experts in international law).

Part II Historical and Legal Sources, Ch.8 General Principles and Constitutions as Sources of Human Rights Law

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
O’Boyle Michael ◽  
Lafferty Michelle
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
General Principles Of Law ◽  
Human Rights Standards

This article examines influence of general principles of law and constitutions in the formulation of human rights standards and in their interpretation and application by international courts, particularly the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). It describes and compares the application and interpretation of human rights by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the European and Inter-American Courts of Human Rights, and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). This article also highlights the fact that majority of human rights instruments and provisions subsequently adopted at the national and international levels have built upon the guarantees elaborated by the UDHR.

Enforcing EUCHR Principles and Fundamental Rights in Environmental Cases

2012 ◽  
Vol 81 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolas de Sadeleer
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Clean Environment

So far, EU treaty law does not encapsulate any individually justiciable rights to a clean environment or to health. The article explores whether individuals can rely on the environmental duties embodied in the European Union Charter of Human Rights (EUCHR), and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in cases falling within the scope of EU environmental law. Moreover, it takes a close examination of the case law of both the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights regarding the standing of individuals whose environment is impaired.

The Genesis of International Justice

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 13-19
Author(s):  
K. L. Chayka ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Legal Theory ◽  
International Justice ◽  
Modern Concept ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Eurasian Economic Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Economic Union

The increasing number of international courts and their specialisation and the penetration of legal positions developed at the supranational level into the practice of domestic courts raise the question of the nature of international justice and its peculiarities. The concepts of national justice and the systemic nature of international courts are well developed in the doctrine, but the issue of international justice remains under-researched. Such an analysis is particularly important because of Russia's membership of the Eurasian Economic Union and the active use of supranational court positions in domestic law enforcement, including judicial enforcement. This article examines the current and historical approaches to the understanding of justice in Russian legal theory and the views of foreign scholarship on procedural justice, which is seen as equivalent to the category of «justice». The aim of this study is to formulate a concept of justice that is free from the peculiarities of national legal systems and able to explain the processes inherent in international courts. The question of the specific features of international justice will be answered, preceded by a reflection on the definition of «international judicial body» in the context of approaches of domestic as well as European. The method of induction has made it possible to identify the specific features inherent in universal international courts as well as in courts of integration associations and, on this basis, to provide a definition for «international judicial body». A comparison of the powers vested in the Court of Justice of the Eurasian Economic Union, the range of persons having the possibility to initiate dispute resolution, the binding and enforceable nature of its acts with similar rules in the activities of the UN International Court of Justice, the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union provides empirical material for analysis of the specific features of the Eurasian dispute resolution body justice. The study concludes that the modern concept of national and international justice has its philosophical basis in the genesis of ideas about human rights and fundamental freedoms. International justice, however, is defined as the legal and procedural activity of an independent judiciary to apply the law and resolve legal conflict.

Decisions of International Courts: Following Precedents or Consistent Jurisprudence?

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 3-21
Author(s):  
Sergei Manzhosov ◽  
Sergey Belov
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Stare Decisis ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
Binding Force ◽  
European Court

The contemporary international law doctrine is critical to the notion of binding force of general positions of international courts. The grounds for this critics is more weighty in international law than in domestic law. If in the latter general binding force of judicial decisions erga omnes questions the separation of powers, in the former the states as the main actors of the international relations try to participate and control any norm-making. At the same time international courts realize the necessity of consistency of interpretation and applying of legal norms and principles, as unpredictable decisions breach the certainty of law. These courts demonstrate surprising uniformity of approaches to this issue, disregarding their status, legal grounds for their jurisdiction, the nature of the cases they consider. The courts recognize their duty to follow the sustainable interpretation of international law, as it appears in the own practice of these courts and other international authorities, because this is crucial for the definiteness of legal regulation, predictability of judicial decisions and consistency of legal solutions. The international courts reject following precedents according to the stare decisis rule and are very caution to declare following the concept of jurisprudence constant, trying to be equidistant to particular legal traditions. The legal acts regulating the international justice favour this caution, as they establish the binding force of judicial decisions only inter partes and within concrete case. In a case of need to deviate from the established practice both the International Court of Justice, International Criminal Court, European Court of Human Rights and international investment arbitration tribunals tend to (1) appeal to formal arguments of non-binding force of previous decisions, or (2) argue the differences of considering case with preceding cases, or (3) base on notions developed in their practice – e.g., the idea of “European consensus” in the practice of the European Court of Human Rights.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document