Introductory Note from the Office of Former President George Bush

In 2015, the jurisprudence of International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) tribunals and ad hoc committees largely followed established lines. However, the awards on jurisdiction in the Poštová banka and the Ping An cases evidenced very restrictive approaches to what is required in order to uphold jurisdiction over ICSID claims. On the substance of claims, the tribunals in Tidewater and in Quiborax reaffirmed the legality requirements of expropriations, a string of cases clarified the contours of the fair and equitable treatment standard, while the ad hoc committees in the Daimler and the Kılıç cases continued to diverge on the scope of most-favoured nation (MFN) clauses.

Download Full-text

Introductory Note

10.1093/oso/9780190848194.003.0015 ◽

2017 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

John G. Merrills

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

International Court Of Justice ◽

Court Of Justice ◽

International Court ◽

Introductory Note

In 2015 the International Court of Justice (ICJ) gave three judgments and made a number of orders. In various ways this jurisprudence, although modest in extent, contributed to the elucidation of international law on several procedural, as well as substantive matters. In that year no new cases were begun, but one case was discontinued. At the beginning of 2016 there were therefore ten cases on the Court’s docket. The Court’s work in 2015 demonstrates that through its decisions it continues to assist states to resolve their international disputes peacefully and at the same time to contribute to the clarification and development of international law.

Download Full-text

Introductory Note

10.1093/oso/9780190923846.003.0027 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Guido Raimondi

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Separation Of Powers ◽

Freedom Of Expression ◽

European Convention ◽

European Court ◽

European Public ◽

Introductory Note ◽

Un Security Council ◽

The Right ◽

The Eu

This article comments on four important judgments given by the European Court of Human Rights in 2016. Al-Dulimi v. Switzerland addresses the issue of how, in the context of sanctions regimes created by the UN Security Council, European states should reconcile their obligations under the UN Charter with their obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights to respect the fundamentals of European public order. Baka v. Hungary concerns the separation of powers and judicial independence, in particular the need for procedural safeguards to protect judges against unjustified removal from office and to protect their legitimate exercise of freedom of expression. Magyar Helsinki Bizottság v. Hungary is a judgment on the interpretation of the Convention, featuring a review of the “living instrument” approach. Avotiņš v. Latvia addresses the principle of mutual trust within the EU legal order and the right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the Convention.

Download Full-text