Published since 1929 (and featuring cases from 1919) the International Law Reports is devoted to the regular and systematic reporting of decisions of international courts and arbitrators and judgments of national courts. Cases are drawn from every relevant jurisdiction--international and national. This series is an essential holding for every library providing even minimal international law coverage. It offers access to international case law in an efficient and economical manner.

This book addresses a growing problem in international law: overlapping claims before national and international jurisdictions. Its contribution is, first, to revisit two pillars of investment arbitration, i.e., shareholders' standing to claim for harm to the company's assets and the contract/treaty claims distinction. These two ideas advance interrelated (and questionable) notions of independence: firstly, independence of shareholder treaty rights in respect of the local company's national law rights and, secondly, independence of treaty claims in respect of national law claims. By uncritically endorsing shareholder standing in indirect claims and the distinctiveness of treaty claims, investment tribunals have overlooked substantive overlaps between contract and treaty claims. The book also proposes specific admissibility criteria. As opposed to strictly jurisdictional approaches to claim overlap, the admissibility approach allows consideration of a broader range of legal reasons, such as risks of multiple recovery and prejudice to third parties.

In this book, the author outlines three independent bases for the existence of legal limits to the veto by UN Security Council permanent members while atrocity crimes are occurring. The provisions of the UN Charter creating the veto cannot override the UN's 'Purposes and Principles', nor jus cogens (peremptory norms of international law). There are also positive obligations imposed by the Geneva and Genocide Conventions in situations of war crimes and genocide - conventions to which all permanent members are parties. The author demonstrates how vetoes and veto threats have blocked the Security Council from pursuing measures that could have prevented or alleviated atrocity crimes (genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes) in places such as Myanmar, Darfur, Syria, and elsewhere. As the practice continues despite regular condemnation by other UN member states and repeated voluntary veto restraint initiatives, the book explores how the legality of this practice could be challenged.

Frequent instances of intervention in current world affairs have threatened the status of nonintervention as a rule of international relations. Gathering evidence from history, law, sociology, and political science, R. J. Vincent concludes that the principle of nonintervention can and must remain viable. The author approaches the question from several angles, seeking to discover why the principle of nonintervention has been asserted as part of the law of nations; whether states in the past and present have conducted their foreign relations according to the principle of nonintervention; and what function the principle performs in the society formed between states. The author examines the principle of nonintervention through examples taken from contemporary world politics, focusing on its role in the doctrine and practice of the Soviet Union, the United States, and the United Nations. He argues that, despite the erosion of the order of sovereign states, the arrival of nuclear response weapons, all-enveloping ideological conflict, and transnational relationships that diminish the significance of state frontiers, the principle of nonintervention continues to contribute to the international order. Originally published in 1974. The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand technology to again make available previously out-of-print books from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press. These editions preserve the original texts of these important books while presenting them in durable paperback and hardcover editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since its founding in 1905.

The Law of International Watercourses is an authoritative guide to the rules of international law governing the navigational and non-navigational uses of international rivers, lakes, and groundwater. The continued growth of the world's population places increasing demands on Earth's finite supplies of fresh water. Because two or more States share many of the world's most important drainage basins - including the Danube, the Ganges, the Indus, the Jordan, the Mekong, the Nile, the Rhine and the Tigris-Euphrates - competition for increasingly scarce fresh water resources will only increase. Agreements between the States sharing international watercourses are negotiated, and disputes over shared water are resolved, against the backdrop of the rules of international law governing the use of this precious resource. The basic legal rules governing the use of shared freshwater for purposes other than navigation are reflected in the 1997 UN Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses. This book devotes a chapter to the 1997 Convention but also examines the factual and legal context in which the Convention should be understood, considers the more important rules of the Convention in some depth, and discusses specific issues that could not be addressed in a framework instrument of that kind. The book reviews the major cases and controversies concerning international watercourses as a background against which to consider the basic substantive and procedural rights and obligations of States in the field. The third edition covers the implications of the 1997 Convention coming into force in August 2014, and the compatibility of the 1997 and 1992 Conventions. This edition also updates the entire book, adds new material to many of the chapters, and adds a number of new case studies, including Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay) and Certain Activities carried out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua), amongst others.

Published annually, Terrorism: International Case Law Reporter is a collection of the most important cases in security law from around the world. Handpicked and introduced by internationally renowned terrorism scholar Michael Newton and by a distinguished board of global experts, the cases included cover topics as diverse as human rights, immigration, freedom of speech, and terrorist financing. All cases are also accompanied by headnotes that summarize the key issues for the benefit of researchers. This unique resource serves scholars, students, and practitioners seeking an authoritative and comprehensive resource for security law research like no other publication on the market.
The 2012 edition includes cases highlighting issues such as:
* Whether the Patriot Act amendment to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, allowing surveillance where a "significant purpose" of the surveillance is foreign intelligence gathering, violates the Fourth Amendment;
* Whether the High Court of Uganda should accept the doctrine of void for vagueness and find the Anti-Terrorism Act as void and unenforceable;
* Whether the motive clause of the Terrorism section of the criminal Code of Canada is unconstitutional;
* Whether India's constitutional right of due process, including the right to both a speedy and a fair trial, requires that a criminal case arising from an incident fifteen years prior be remanded for a de novo trial or be vacated;
* Whether the Torture Victim Protection Act extends liability against nonsovereign organizations;
* Whether the United Kingdom Borders Act of 2007 creates a statutory presumption that deportation of a foreign criminal is in the public's interest which supersedes the determination of a court and the immigrant's interest of remaining in the nation; and
* Does the state secrets doctrine overcome an individual's right of truth in an extraordinary rendition case?
Each annual edition serves a function of unique and growing importance as the one source that juxtaposes international decisions with those emanating from domestic forums. The comprehensive index also helps the reader to synthesize the commonality of issues.
This publication can also be purchased on a standing order basis.

The Milo%sevi'c Trial - An Autopsy provides a cross-disciplinary examination of one of the most controversial war crimes trials of the modern era and its contested legacy for the growing fields of international criminal law and post-conflict justice.
The international trial of Slobodan Milo%sevi'c, who presided over the violent collapse of Yugoslavia - was already among the longest war crimes trials when Milo%sevi'c died in 2006. Yet precisely because it ended without judgment, its significance and legacy are specially contested. The contributors to this volume, including trial participants, area specialists, and international law scholars bring a variety of perspectives as they examine the meaning of the trial's termination and its implications for post-conflict justice. The book's approach is intensively cross-disciplinary, weighing the implications for law, politics, and society that modern war crimes trials create.
The time for such an examination is fitting, with the imminent closing of the Yugoslav war crimes tribunal and rising debates over its legacy, as well as the 20th anniversary of the outbreak of the Yugoslav conflict. The Milo%sevi'c Trial - An Autopsy brings thought-provoking insights into the impact of war crimes trials on post-conflict justice.

The defences available to an agent accused of wrongdoing can be considered as justifications (which render acts lawful) or excuses (which shield the agent from the legal consequences of the wrongful act). This distinction is familiar to many domestic legal systems, and tracks analogous notions in moral philosophy and ordinary language. Nevertheless, it remains contested in some domestic jurisdictions where it is often argued that the distinction is purely theoretical and has no consequences in practice. In international law too the distinction has been fraught with controversy, though there are increasing calls for its recognition. This book is the first to comprehensively and thoroughly examine the distinction and its relevance to the international legal order. Combining an analysis of state practice, and historical, doctrinal and theoretical developments, the book shows that the distinction is not only possible in international law but that it is also one that would have important practical implications.

This book takes an inductive approach to the question of whether there is a hierarchy in international law, with human rights obligations trumping other duties. It assesses the extent to which such a hierarchy can be said to exist through an analysis of the case law of national courts. Each chapter of the book examines domestic case law on an issue where human rights obligations conflict with another international law requirement, to see whether national courts gave precedence to human rights. If this is shown to be the case, it would lend support to the argument that the international legal order is moving toward a vertical legal system, with human rights at its apex. In resolving conflicts between human rights obligations and other areas of international law, the practice of judicial bodies, both domestic and international, is crucial. Judicial practice indicates that norm conflicts typically manifest themselves in situations where human rights obligations are at odds with other international obligations, such as immunities; extradition and refoulement; trade and investment law; and environmental protection. This book sets out and analyses the relevant case law in all of these areas.

As the Kadi-hype following the 2008 European Court of Justice judgment demonstrated, there are many problems associated with the judicial review of acts of international organizations. This book is the first to present a broader overview of how acts of international organizations have been challenged before national courts. It covers such diverse organizations as the United Nations, its subsidiary organs, such as the specialized international criminal courts for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, the European Patent Office, the European Schools, EUROCONTROL, OPEC, and INTERPOL Building extensively on the case law of domestic courts, the chapters highlight reoccurring legal issues in light of four working hypotheses. These relate to the nature of judicial review of the acts of international organizations, its interdependence with domestic methods of incorporating international law, the conditions of a human rights-based review, and the tension between the independent functioning of an organization and guaranteeing legal protection against its acts. This approach ensures consistency among the book's chapters, which each focus on a different organization. Its conclusion brings the different findings together and analyses them in the light of the working hypotheses. It also discusses whether attempts to secure a certain minimum level of legal protection against acts of international organizations through judicial review by national courts may contribute to securing greater accountability of international organizations.

The growing number of international courts and tribunals and their bourgeoning case law have fuelled concerns about the fragmentation of international law. This arises as a consequence of both the specialized regimes these courts create and the multiple ways in which they may interpret international law emanating from other sources.
This book considers this issue by examining the busiest and arguably most successful international court, the European Court of Human Rights. More specifically, it focuses on the jurisprudence of the Court and its predecessor, the European Commission of Human Rights, covering a range of special human rights regimes, treaty law, and the case law of the International Court of Justice.
The author assesses whether the Court has been able to adopt a coherent, comprehensive approach to the interpretation and evaluation of international law and thus the extent to which it has been able to contribute to the development and coherence of international law.

Twenty-first-century trade agreements increasingly are a source of international law on investment and competition. With chapters contributed by leading practitioners and academics, this volume draws upon investor-state arbitration and competition/antitrust disputes to focus on the application of economics to international trade law and specifically WTO law. Written in an accessible language suitable for a broad readership while providing concrete insights designed for the specialist, this book will be of use to those active or interested in the related fields of trade disputes, competition law, and investor-state arbitration.

A central development in international law is the intensified juridification of international relations by a growing number of international courts. With this in mind, this book discusses how international judicial authority is established and managed in key fields of international economic law: trade law, investor-state arbitration and international commercial arbitration. Adopting a unique legal-centric approach, the analysis explores the interplay between these areas of economic dispute resolution, tracing their parallel developments and identifying the ways they influence each other on processual mechanisms and solutions. Drawing together contributions from many leading scholars across the world, this volume considers issues such as the usage of precedent and the role of legitimacy, suggesting that the consolidation of judicial authority is a universal trend which impacts on state behaviour.

We could not have a global economy without a system to resolve commercial disputes across borders, but the international regime that performs this key role bears little resemblance to other institutions underpinning the global economy. A hybrid of private arbitral institutions, international treaties, and domestic laws and courts, the regime for commercial dispute resolution shows that effective transborder institutions can take a variety of forms. This book offers the first comprehensive social scientific account of this surprisingly effective regime. It maps and explains its evolution since the Industrial Revolution, both at the global level and in the United States, Argentina, and China. The book shows how both political economy approaches and socio-legal theories have shaped institutional outcomes. While economic interests have been the chief determinants, legal processes have played a key role in shaping the form institutions take. The regime for commercial dispute resolution therefore remains between interests and law.

This examination of the law in action of WTO dispute settlement takes a developing-country perspective. Providing a bottom-up assessment of the challenges, experiences and strategies of individual developing countries, it assesses what these countries have done and can do to build the capacity to deploy and shape the WTO legal system, as well as the daunting challenges that they face. Chapters address developing countries of varying size and wealth, including China, India, Brazil, Argentina, Thailand, South Africa, Egypt, Kenya and Bangladesh. Building from empirical work by leading academics and practitioners, this book provides a much needed understanding of how the WTO dispute settlement system actually operates behind the scenes for developing countries.

A breach of fair and equitable treatment is alleged in almost every investor-state dispute. It has therefore become a controversial norm, which touches many questions at the heart of general international law. In this book, Roland Klager sheds light on these controversies by exploring the deeper doctrinal foundations of fair and equitable treatment and reviewing its contentious relationship with the international minimum standard. The norm is also discussed in light of the fragmentation of international law, theories of international justice and rational balancing, and the idea of constitutionalism in international law. In this vein, a shift in the way of addressing fair and equitable treatment is proposed by focusing on the process of justificatory reasoning.

A breach of fair and equitable treatment is alleged in almost every investor-state dispute. It has therefore become a controversial norm, which touches many questions at the heart of general international law. In this book, Roland Klager sheds light on these controversies by exploring the deeper doctrinal foundations of fair and equitable treatment and reviewing its contentious relationship with the international minimum standard. The norm is also discussed in light of the fragmentation of international law, theories of international justice and rational balancing, and the idea of constitutionalism in international law. In this vein, a shift in the way of addressing fair and equitable treatment is proposed by focusing on the process of justificatory reasoning.

What does it take for warnings about violent conflict and war to be listened to, believed and acted upon? Why are warnings from some sources noticed and largely accepted, while others are ignored or disbelieved? These questions are central to considering the feasibility of preventing harm to the economic and security interests of states. Challenging conventional accounts that tend to blame decision-makers' lack of receptivity and political will, the authors offer a new theoretical framework explaining how distinct 'paths of persuasion' are shaped by a select number of factors, including conflict characteristics, political contexts, and source-recipient relations. This is the first study to systematically integrate persuasion attempts by analysts, diplomats and senior officials with those by journalists and NGO staff. Its ambitious comparative design encompasses three states (the US, UK, and Germany) and international organisations (the UN, EU, and OSCE) and looks in depth at four conflict cases: Rwanda (1994), Darfur (2003), Georgia (2008) and Ukraine (2014).

The essential reference work on international law, edited by two leading authors in the field is now available from Oxford University Press. This classic Ninth edition takes full account of the vast increase in the scope and content of international law since the Eighth edition, and in the range of available source material since the Eighth edition was published.

The United Nations Security Council has increasingly resorted to sanctions as part of its efforts to prevent and resolve conflict. In this 2007 book, Farrall traces the evolution of the Security Council's sanctions powers and charts the contours of the UN sanctions system. He also evaluates the extent to which the Security Council's increasing commitment to strengthening the rule of law extends to its sanctions practice. The book identifies shortcomings in respect of key rule of law principles and advances pragmatic policy-reform proposals designed to ensure that UN sanctions promote, strengthen and reinforce the rule of law. In its appendices United Nations Sanctions and the Rule of Law contains summaries of all 25 UN sanctions regimes established to date by the Security Council. It forms an invaluable source of reference for diplomats, policymakers, scholars and advocates.

The Dispute Settlement Reports of the World Trade Organization (WTO) include Panel and Appellate Body reports, as well as arbitration awards, in disputes concerning the rights and obligations of WTO members under the provisions of the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization. These are the WTO authorized and paginated reports in English. An essential addition to the library of all practising and academic trade lawyers, and needed by students worldwide taking courses in international economic or trade law. Among others, DSR 2007: I reports on United States - Measures Relating to Zeroing and Sunset Reviews.

Despite the unprecedented growth of arbitration and other means of ADR in treaties and transnational contracts in recent years, there remains no clearly defined mechanism for control of the system. One of the oldest yet largely marginalized concepts in law is the public policy exception. This doctrine grants discretion to courts to set aside private legal arrangements, including arbitration, which might be considered harmful to the "public". The exceptional and vague nature of the doctrine, along with the strong push of actors in dispute resolution, has transformed it, in certain jurisdictions, to a toothless doctrine. At the international level, the notion of transnational public policy has been devised in order to capture norms that are "truly" transnational and amenable for application in cross-border litigations. Yet, despite the importance of this discussion-a safety valve and a control mechanism for today's international and domestic international dispute resolution- no major study has ventured to review and analyze it. This book provides a historical, theoretical and practical background on public policy in dispute resolution with a focus on cross-border and transnational disputes. Farshad Ghodoosi argues that courts should adopt a more systemic approach to public policy while rejecting notions such as transnational public policy, which limits the application of those norms with mandatory nature. Contrary to the current trend, the book invites the reader to re-conceptualize the role of public policy, and transnational dispute resolution, in order to have more sustainable, fair and efficient mechanisms for resolving disputes outside of national courts. The book sheds light on one of the most important yet often-neglected control mechanisms of today's international dispute resolution and will be of particular interest to students and academics in the fields of International Investment Law, International Trade Law, Business and Economics.

On the 10th of October 2002 the International Court of Justice delivered the Bakassi decision, which, amongst other things, excised the resource rich land and maritime territory of Bakassi from Nigeria and transferred its legal title to Cameroon. These two countries under the auspices of the United Nations established the mechanism of the Cameroon-Nigeria Mixed Commission to honour and implement their obligations under the ICJ decision. Over a decade after the ICJ decision this volume brings together academics and practitioners to assess the impact of this decision and the challenges and issues that have been raised in the course of its implementation. Hailed by some as a model of preventive diplomacy and a blueprint for the future, this timely assessment illuminates the difficulties in imposing such controversial decisions and considers whether this type of Mixed Commission is an adequate mechanism for implementing them.

Bringing together articles by some of the leading policy-makers, including previous WTO Director-Generals, practitioners, scholars of international trade law, government officials, international civil servants, members of the WTO Appellate Body, and judges from a number of international tribunals, this volume assesses the first ten years of the World Trade Organization. It examines: the relationship and balance between political governance and dispute settlement; the functioning of the dispute settlement procedures and various reform proposals; the contribution of the Appellate Body to the development of international trade law; and treaty interpretation in a number of international dispute settlement fora such as the WTO, the International Court of Justice, the European Court of Justice, and the Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. The book has its origins in a series of events commemorating the tenth anniversary of the creation of the Appellate Body.

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea is one of the most important constitutive instruments in international law. Not only does this treaty regulate the uses of the world's largest resource, but it also contains a mandatory dispute settlement system - an unusual phenomenon in international law. While some scholars have lauded this development as a significant achievement, others have been highly skeptical of its comprehensiveness and effectiveness. This book explores whether a compulsory dispute settlement mechanism is necessary for the regulation of the oceans under the Convention. The requisite role of dispute settlement in the Convention is determined through an assessment of its relationship to the substantive provisions. Klein firstly describes the dispute settlement procedure in the Convention. She then takes each of the issue areas subject to limitations or exceptions to compulsory procedures entailing binding decisions, and analyzes the inter-relationship between the substantive and procedural rules.