The Sixth Year of the Permanent Court of International Justice

1928 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-27
Author(s):  
Manley O. Hudson

The sixth year of the Permanent Court of International Justice has been busy and fruitful. The judges have been kept continuously at The Hague from the beginning of the twelfth(ordinary) session on June 15, 1927, to the end of the session on December 16, 1927. During the year the court has handed down four important orders, four judgments, and oneadvisory opinion. The following countries have been involved in cases or questions before the court during this period: Belgium, British Empire, China, Danzig, France, Germany Greece, Italy, Poland, Roumania, Turkey. The extent to which the court has been resortedto in six years is the best proof that it is filling a need in the international life ofour time. Whereas, in the course of its first six years, the Supreme Court of the Unite States handled but twelve cases, the Permanent Court of International Justice has now given eleven judgments and fourteen advisory opinions. Such a record seems to presage a useful rôle for the court in the future. It has now become so embedded in the world's treaty law that it would seem very difficult for the world ever again to be without it. In six years it has made significant contributions to our growing international jurisprudence, some of the most important of which have been made during the last twelve months.

1929 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manley O. Hudson

Several important events have marked the seventh year in the history of the Permanent Court of International Justice. The court was in session at The Hague from February 6, 1928, to April 26, 1928 (thirteenth session); from June 15, 1928, to September 13, 1928 (fourteenth session); and from November 12, 1928, to November 21, 1928 (fifteenth session). It handed down two advisory opinions (Nos. 15 and 16) and two judgments (Nos. 12 and 13), and several important orders. It lost the services of two eminent judges through the resignation of Judge John Bassett Moore and the death of Judge André Weiss. A settlement was reached with the Netherlands Government of the long-standing question as to the privileges and immunities of the judges and registry officials; and, what is perhaps more important for the court’s future, the signatories of the court’s protocol of signature began the consideration of changes in the court’s statute in the light of seven years’ experience. The seventh year marks progress in the establishment of the court’s position as the chief agency in the world for the international administration of justice, as it marks also changes which will affect the future of the court.


2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. Christopher-Vajda
Author(s):  
Christopher Vajda

Following the expiry on 31 December 2020 of the ‘transition period’ under the UK/EU Withdrawal Agreement, the relationship between UK and EU law had changed. Whilst much EU legislation at that date will continue to apply in UK law as ‘retained EU law’ and judgments of the EU courts handed down before that date will remain binding on UK courts as ‘retained EU case law’, the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court can depart from that case law. Whilst EU court judgments handed down after that date are not binding on UK courts, they may be taken into account. This article considers both the status of EU retained case law and when the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal may depart from it, and the future of EU law that is not ‘retained EU case law’ and how judgments of the European Courts and national courts of its Member States may influence UK judges in the future.


2016 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 227
Author(s):  
Matthew Barber

In the Supreme Court decision of Vector Gas Ltd v Bay of Plenty Energy Ltd, Tipping J put forward an approach to contact interpretation that, while indebted to that of Lord Hoffmann, was expressed differently and promoted the use of evidence of prior negotiations. Despite not gaining the support of any of the other sitting judges, this approach was swiftly taken up in the lower courts and, until recently at least, seems to have been accepted as representing New Zealand law. This article attempts a comprehensive examination of Tipping J’s approach. It concludes that, while coherent in principle, the detail of the approach is flawed in a number of ways, especially the way in which evidence of subsequent conduct is assumed to work. The future of Tipping J’s approach is considered.


2021 ◽  
pp. 62-77
Author(s):  
L. L. Kofanov ◽  

The paper deals with the Roman senatus in the period from 5th to 3rd century BC, from the point of view of its composition, completion and selected competences. As to its composition, in the most arcaic times of the Roman state, the senate was an assembly of the heads of clans (patres gentium), who represented the ideas of patricians. The autor presents gradual transformation of the composition of the senate and switch towards the inclusion of the plebeians. It describes also the process of the cooptation of the members, rules of which incurred fundamental changes from the hereditary principles to the regulation given by statutes. A significant part of the article is devoted to the judicial functions of the Senate and the relationship between the iudicium senatus and the iudicium populi, the transformation of the Senate court from a regional body to the highest, global court of the entire Mediterranean. It’s noted that if the original Roman Senate de iure was the judicial authority only one of the Latin Confederation, later after 338 BC, it becomes the Supreme court of the Latin Union, and by the end of the Republic is transformed into the «Supreme Council of the world».


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document