Solution des différends internationaux
Le règlement des différends internationaux concerne les techniques et institutions qui sont utilisées pour résoudre les différends internationaux entre États et/ou organisations internationales. Les différends internationaux peuvent être résolus soit par la force (coercition) soit par des moyens pacifiques. Les techniques utilisées pour le règlement pacifique des différends internationaux sont la négociation, les enquêtes, la médiation, la conciliation, l'arbitrage, le règlement judiciaire, le recours à des agences régionales ou à des arrangements, ou à d'autres moyens pacifiques au choix des parties (Art.33 de la charte ONU).
Le présent guide de recherche se veut un point de départ pour mener des recherches sur la solution des différends internationaux. Il fournit les textes juridiques de base disponibles à la Bibliothèque du Palais de la Paix, qu'il s'agisse de documents imprimés ou de documents sous format électronique. La section intitulée "Bibliographie sélective" présente une sélection de manuels, d'articles importants, de bibliographies, de publications périodiques, de publications en série et de documents pertinents. Des liens permettent de rejoindre le catalogue PPL. Le code de classification de la bibliothèque 180. Solution pacifique en général, 185. Arbitrage et Tribunaux: Ouvrages généraux et le mot-matière (mot-clef) Règlement international des différends sont des instruments permettant de faire une recherche dans le catalogue. Une attention particulière est prêtée à nos inscriptions aux bases de données, revues électroniques, livres électroniques et autres ressources électroniques. Enfin, le présent guide de recherche contient des liens vers des sites Internet pertinents et d'autres ressources en ligne présentant un intérêt particulier.
- Mackenzie, R. (et al.), The Manual on International Courts and Tribunals (2nd ed.), Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2010. [e-book]
- Romano, C.P.R., K.J. Alter and Y. Shany (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Adjudication, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2014. [e-book]
- Schabas, W.A., and S. Murphy (eds.), Research Handbook on International Courts and Tribunals, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2017.
- Alter, K.J., The New Terrain of International Law: Courts, Politics, Rights, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2014.
- Alter, K.J. (et al.) (eds.), International Court Authority, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2018. [e-book] August
- Andenas, M., and E. Bjorge (eds.), A Farewell to Fragmentation: Reassertion and Convergence in International Law, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2015. [e-book]
- Benvenisti, E., and G.W. Downs, Between Fragmentation and Democracy: The Role of National and International Courts, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2017.
- Bogdandy, A. von, and I. Venzke, In Whose Name? A Public Law Theory of International Adjudication, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2014.
- Brilmayer, L. (et al.), International Claims Commissions: Righting Wrongs after Conflict, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2017.
- Buggenhoudt, C., Common Interests in International Litigation: A Case Study on Natural Resource Exploitation Disputes, Cambridge, Intersentia, 2017.
- De Baere, G., and J. Wouters (eds.), The Contribution of International and Supranational Courts to the Rule of Law, Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2015.
- Follesdal, A., and G. Ulfstein (eds.), The Judicialization of International Law : A Mixed Blessing?, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2018. [e-book] Oct.
- Gallus, N., Temporal Jurisdiction of International Tribunals, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2017.
- Giorgetti, C. (ed.), The Rules, Practice, and Jurisprudence of International Courts and Tribunals, Leiden, Nijhoff, 2012.
- Giorgetti, C. (ed.), Challenges and Recusals of Judges and Arbitrators in International Courts and Tribunals, Leiden, Brill Nijhoff, 2015.
- Grossman, N. (et al.) (eds.), Legitimacy and International Courts, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018. [e-book] Feb.
- Howse, R. (et al.) (eds.), The Legitimacy of International Trade Courts and Tribunals, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018. [e-book] June
- Johns, L., Strengthening International Courts: The Hidden Costs of Legalization, Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press, 2015.
- Klein, N. (ed.), Litigating International Law Disputes: Weighing the Options, Cambridge New York, Cambridge University Press, 2014.
- Kotuby Jr., C.T., and L.A. Sobota, General Principles of Law and International Due Process: Principles and Norms Applicable in Transnational Disputes, New York, NY, Oxford University Press, 2017.
- Salles, L.E., Forum Shopping in International Adjudication, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2014.
- Shany, Y., Questions of Jurisdiction and Admissibility before International Courts, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2016.
- Squatrito, T. (et al.) (eds.), The Performance of International Courts and Tribunals, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018. [e-book] Mar.
- Tanaka, Y., The Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018. [e-book] June
- Vecchio, A. del, International Courts and Tribunals between Globalisation and Localism, 's-Gravenhage, Eleven International Publishing, 2013.
- Wehberg, H, The Problem of an International Court of Justice (transl. by C.G. Fenwick), Oxford, Clarendon, 1918 (2nd printing, Clark, NJ, The Lawbook Exchange, 2010).
- Wiik, A., Amicus Curiae Before International Courts and Tribunals, Baden-Baden, Nomos, 2018.
- Wind, M. (ed.), International Courts and Domestic Politics, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018. [e-book] Oct.
- Wolfrum, R. and I. Gätzschmann (eds.), International Dispute Settlement: Room for Innovations?, Heidelberg, Springer, 2012.
- Alter, K.J. (et al.), “International Court Authority (Introduction)”, in ibid. (eds.), International Court Authority, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2018; iCourts Working Paper Series, No. 112; Northwestern Public Law Research Paper No. 17-33, 2018. [PDF] Jan.
- Alter, K.J. (et al.), “Theorizing the Judicialization of International Relations”, iCourts Working Paper Series; Duke Law School Public Law & Legal Theory Series, 2018. [PDF] Nov.
- Boisson de Chazournes, L. (et al.), “One Size does not Fit All: Uses of Experts before International Courts and Tribunals: An Insight into the Practice”, Journal of International Dispute Settlement, April 25, 2018. [e-article]
- Brosseau, J., “The Distinction Between Arbitration and Judicial Settlement in International Law: Three Characteristics and Why They Matter Reforms”, King’s Student Law Review, 9 (2019), No. 2, Forthcoming. [PDF] Dec.
- Cook, K., “Judging ‘Best Available Science’: Emerging Issues and the Role of Experts”, Journal of International Dispute Settlement, April 23, 2018. [e-article]
- De Brabandere, E., ‘To The Hague!’, International Dispute Settlement from Practice to Legal Discipline, Inaugural lecture, Leiden University, February 2018. [PDF] August
- Dothan, S., “The Motivations of Individual Judges and how They Act as a Group”, German Law Journal, 19 (2018), Forthcoming; iCourts Working Paper Series, No. 132. [PDF] June
- Dothan, S., “International Courts Improve Public Deliberation”, Michigan Journal of International Law, 39 (2018), No. 2, pp. 217-240. [PDF] August
- Dunoff, J.L., and M.A. Pollack, “International Judicial Performances and the Performance of International Courts”, in T. Squatrito (et al.) (eds.), The Performance of International Courts and Tribunals, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018. [e-article] July
- Liao, S., “Fact-Finding in Non-Appearance Before International Courts and Tribunals”, January 2018. [PDF] June
- Madsen, M., “Who Rules the World? The Educational Capital of the International Judiciary”, Forthcoming in University of California Journal of International, Transnational, and Comparative Law; iCourts Working Paper Series No. 127, 2018. [PDF] May.
- Odermatt, J., “Patterns of Avoidance: Political Questions Before International Courts”, International Journal of Law in Context, 14(2), Forthcoming; iCourts Working Paper Series No. 120 (March 2018). [PDF]
- Paine, J., “International Adjudication as a Global Public Good?” (October 8, 2018), Forthcoming in European Journal of International Law. [PDF] Dec.
- Pauwelyn, J., and R.J. Hamilton, “Exit from International Tribunals”, Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 9 (2018), No. 4, pp. 679-690. [e-article] August
- Shaffer, G.C., “A Tragedy in the Making?: The Decline of Law and the Return of Power in International Trade Relations”, Yale Journal of International Law Online, 2018; UC Irvine School of Law Research Paper No. 2018-64. [PDF] Dec.
- Schultz, T., and N. Ridi, "Comity and International Courts and Tribunals", LawArXiv (April 29, 2018). [e-article]
2017 and before
- Alter, K.J. (et al.), “How Context Shapes the Authority of International Courts”, Law and Contemporary Problems, 79 (2016), No. 1; iCourts Working Paper Series, No. 18, 2015; Duke Law School Public Law and Legal Theory Series, No. 2015-13. [PDF]
- Baetens, F., “Judicial Review of International Adjudicatory Decisions: A Cross-Regime Comparison of Annulment and Appellate Mechanisms”, Journal of International Dispute Settlement, (September 2016), pp. 1-28. [e-article]
- Becker, M.A., and C. Rose, “Investigating the Value of Site Visits in Inter-State Arbitration and Adjudication”, Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 8 (2017), No. 2, pp. 219-249.
- Bernstorff, J. von, “Hans Kelsen on Judicial Law-Making by International Courts and Tribunals: A Theory of Global Judicial Imperialism?”, European Society of International Law (ESIL) Annual Conference, Oslo, 2015. [PDF]
- Blokker, N., “The Governance of International Courts and Tribunals: Organizing and Guaranteeing Independence and Accountability - A Appeal for Research”, European Society of International Law (ESIL) Annual Conference, Oslo, 2015. [PDF]
- Bogdandy, A. von, and I. Venzke, "International Courts as Lawmakers", in R. Wolfrum and I. Gätzschmann (eds.), International Dispute Settlement: Room for Innovations?, Heidelberg, Springer, 2013, pp.161-213.
- Brabandere, E. de.,"Non-State Actors and the Proliferation and Individualization of International Dispute Settlement", in B. Reinalda (ed.), The Ashgate Research Companion to Non-State Actors, Farnham, Ashgate, 2011, pp. 347-359.
- Cohen, M., “On the Linguistic Design of Multinational Courts: The French Capture”,International Journal of Constitutional Law, 14 (2016), No. 2, pp. 490-517.
- Crawford, J., “The Place of the International Court in International Dispute Settlement”, in ibid. (et al.) (eds.), The International Legal Order: Current Needs and Possible Responses: Essays in Honour of Djamchid Momtaz, Leiden, Brill Nijhoff, 2017, pp. 95-116. [e-article]
- Crow, K., “A Taxonomy of Proportionality in International Courts”, iCourts Working Paper Series, No. 107 (2017). [PDF]
- Daly, T.G., “The End of Law's Ambition: Human Rights Courts, Democratisation and Social Justice”, iCourts Working Paper Series, No. 49, 2016. [PDF]
- d'Aspremont, J., “The Control Over Knowledge by International Courts and Arbitral Tribunals” (Sept. 2017), in T. Schultz, and F. Ortino (eds.), Oxford Handbook of International Arbitration, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2018, Forthcoming. [PDF]
- De Baere, G. (et al.), “International Courts as Keepers of the Rule of Law: Achievements, Challenges, and Opportunities”, New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, 48 (2016), No. 3, pp. 715-793.
- Dunoff, J.L., and M.A. Pollack, “The Judicial Trilemma”, American Journal of International Law, 111 (2017), No. 2, pp. 225-276.
- Giorgetti, C., “Between Legitimacy and Control: Challenges and Recusals of Judges and Arbitrators in International Courts and Tribunals”, George Washington International Law Review, 49 (2016), No. 2, pp. 205-258. [PDF]
- Goldstone, R., “International Judges: Is there a Global Ethic?”, Ethics and International Affairs, 29 (2015), No. 3, pp 249-258.
- Kassoti, E, “Fragmentation and Inter-Judicial Dialogue: The CJEU and the ICJ at the Interface”, European Journal of Legal Studies, 8 (2015), No. 2, pp. 21-49 [PDF]
- Kornfeld, I.E., “Are International Courts the Best Adjudicators of Environmental Disputes?”, in Encyclopedia of Environmental Law: Volume II, 2016. [PDF]
- Madsen, M.R., “The New Sociology of International Courts”, ESIL Reflections, 4 (2015), No. 10. [PDF]
- Olsen, H.P., “International Courts and the Doctrinal Channels of Legal Diplomacy”, iCourts Working Paper Series, No. 25, 2015. [PDF]
- Pauwelyn , J., “Defenses and the Burden of Proof in International Law”. Forthcoming in L. Bartels and F. Paddeu (eds.), Exceptions in International Law, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2017. [PDF]
- Reisman, W.M., and M.H. Arsanjani, “Legal Decisions and their Implementation in International Law”, in J. Crawford (et al.) (eds.), The International Legal Order: Current Needs and Possible Responses: Essays in Honour of Djamchid Momtaz, Leiden, Brill Nijhoff, 2017, pp. 149-161. [e-article]
- Romano, C.P.R., “International Judicialization in the Arab World: An Initial Assessment”, iCourts Working Paper Series, No. 49, 2016. [PDF]
- Schultz, T., and F. Ost, “Shakespearean Legal Thought in International Dispute Settlement”, 2017. [PDF]
- Singh, P., “Revisiting the Role of International Courts and Tribunals”, in P. Singh and B. Mayer (eds.), Critical International Law: Postrealism, Postcolonialism, and Transnationalism, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2014.
- Soave, T., “The Politics of Invisibility: Why Are International Judicial Bureaucrats Obscured from View?”, Book Project, Conference on the Legitimacy of Unseen Actors in International Adjudication (The Hague, 26 and 27 October 2017). [PDF]
- Strong, S.I., “General Principles of Procedural Law and Procedural Jus Cogens”, Penn State Law Review, 122 (2018 Forthcoming); University of Missouri School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2017-20. [PDF]
- Swinehart, M.W., “Reliability of Expert Evidence in International Disputes”, Michigan Journal of International Law, 38 (2017), No. 2, pp. 193-243.
- Wass, J., “Jurisdiction by Estoppel and Acquiescence in International Courts and Tribunals”, British Yearbook of International Law, 86 (2017), pp. 155-195.
- Wolfrum, R., "Advisory Opinions: Are they a Suitable Alternative for the Settlement of International Disputes?", in R. Wolfrum and I. Gätzschmann (eds.), International Dispute Settlement: Room for Innovations?, Heidelberg, Springer, 2013, pp. 35-67.
- O'Connell, M.E., International Dispute Resolution: Cases and Materials, Durham, NC, Carolina Academic Press, 2012.
- Tams, J.T. and A. Tzanakopoulos (comp.), Basic Documents on the Settlement of International Disputes, Oxford and Portland, Oregon, Hart Publishing, 2012.
Periodicals, serial publications
- Journal of International Dispute Settlement: Table of Contents
- Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals: Table of Contents
- McGill Journal of Dispute Resolution (Open access)
- Transnational Dispute Management: Table of Contents
The Peace Palace Library has a collection of over a million publications. Each week, about six hundred new titles are added to our collection: books, articles, documents, online publications, etc. On this page, access is provided to this week’s new titles on Settlement of international disputes. It covers both means, procedures and activities.
1. Dawr al-Ittiḥād al-Afrīqī fī taswiyyat al-nizāʿ fī Dārfūr, 2003-2009
Keywords: Darfur, Dispute resolution,
2. Contribution to the international legal method
Keywords: Judges, Dissenting opinions, Cases, Methodology,
3. On nuclear weapons
Keywords: Judges, Nuclear weapons, Cases, Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (London, Moscow, Washington, D.C., 1 July 1968),
4. I.C.J.'s judicial functions
Keywords: Judges, United Nations, International Court of Justice, Security Council, Dissenting opinions, Cases, Air transport, Terrorism,
Choix de bibliothécaire
Wind, M. (ed.), International Courts and Domestic Politics, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018. [e-book]View this title in our link resolver Plinklet
Most studies describing the evolution of international courts (ICs) have either drawn on classical legalistic approaches or been developed by constitutionalists. What has unified both strands of research is the often implicit description of a universal and unidirectional strengthening of legalization and judicialization in global affairs. The present volume puts the question in a different way. It does not from the outset normatively assume that ICs are important and powerful actors or that national actors without further ado cite, embrace or enter into a constructive dialogue with these supranational bodies. Rather what this book does is to ask - from a multidisciplinary perspective - how and to what degree do ICs actually influence, impose constraints on and create loyalty from those actors involved? It is our claim that rather little research has been occupied with the actual effects on the ground for those national courts, political institutions and citizens who are formally governed by the increased judicialization. International law in national courts, and among politicians and citizens, does not always have the desired effect at the domestic level. This volume is a genuinely interdisciplinary analysis of international law and courts, examining a wide range of courts and judicial bodies, including human rights treaty bodies, and their impact and shortcomings. By employing social science methodology combined with classical case studies, leading lawyers and political scientists move the study of courts within international law to an entirely new level. The essays question the view that legal dogmatics will be enough to understand the increasingly complex world we are living in and demonstrate the potential benefits of adopting a much broader outlook drawing on empirical legal research.
Follesdal, A., and G. Ulfstein (eds.), The Judicialization of International Law : A Mixed Blessing?, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2018.View this title in our link resolver Plinklet
The influence of international courts is ubiquitous, covering areas from the law of the sea to international criminal law. This judicialization of international law is often lauded for bringing effective global governance, upholding the rule of law, and protecting the right of individuals. Yet at what point does the omnipresence of the international judiciary shackle national sovereign freedom? And can the lack of political accountability be justified? The editors bring together the creme de la creme of the legal academic world to ask the big questions for the international judiciary: whether they are there for mere dispute settlement or to set precedent, and how far they can enforce international obligations without impacting on democratic self-determination.
Alter, K.J. (et al.) (eds.), International Court Authority, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2018. [e-book]View this title in our link resolver Plinklet
An innovative, interdisciplinary and far-reaching examination of the actual reality of international courts, International Court Authority challenges fundamental preconceptions about when, why, and how international courts become important and authoritative actors in national, regional, and international politics. A stellar group of scholars investigate the challenges that international courts face in transforming the formal legal authority conferred by states into an actual authority in fact that is respected by potential litigants, national actors, legal communities, and publics. The book provides a novel framework for conceptualizing international court authority that focuses on the reactions and practices of these key audiences. Eighteen scholars from the disciplines of law, political science and sociology apply this framework to study thirteen international courts operating in Africa, Latin America, and Europe, as well as on a global level. Together the contributors document and explore important and interesting variations in whether the audiences that interact with international courts around the world embrace or reject the rulings of these judicial institutions.
Wiik, A., Amicus Curiae Before International Courts and Tribunals, Baden-Baden, Nomos, 2018.View this title in our link resolver Plinklet
Amicus curiae participation in international courts and investment arbitration tribunals is increasing despite lack of clarity on the concept's nature, function and added value in international dispute settlement. The book examines the laws and practices of amicus curiae to assess the concept's status quo, and to determine if it meets the many expectations. Does it infuse proceedings with alternative views and the public interest? Does it increase the legitimacy and transparency of international dispute settlement, or the coherence of international law? Or does it derail the proceedings at the expense of the parties to advance its agenda? The book argues that neither the expectations nor the concerns attached to amicus curiae have materialized. It shows a hesitation by courts with a strong adversarial tradition to consider the views of non-parties, and argues that amicus curiae is not the best vehicle to present a public interest or increase legitimacy. However, it can improve judicial decisions and decision-making if regulated and used properly.
Howse, R. (et al.) (eds.), The Legitimacy of International Trade Courts and Tribunals, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018. [e-book]View this title in our link resolver Plinklet
The recent rise of international trade courts and tribunals deserves systemic study and in-depth analysis. This volume gathers contributions from experts specialised in different regional adjudicators of trade disputes and scrutinises their operations in the light of the often-debated legitimacy issues. It not only looks into prominent adjudicators that have played a significant role for global and regional integration; it also encloses the newly established and/or less-known judicial actors. Critical topics covered range from procedures and legal techniques during the adjudication process to the pre- and post-adjudication matters in relation to forum selection and decision implementation. The volume features cross-cutting interdisciplinary discussions among academics and practitioners, lawyers, philosophers and political scientists. In addition to fulfilling the research vacuum, it aims to address the challenges and opportunities faced in international trade adjudication.
Squatrito, T. (et al.) (eds.), The Performance of International Courts and Tribunals, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018. [e-book]View this title in our link resolver Plinklet
International courts and tribunals now operate globally and in several world regions, playing significant roles in international law and global governance. However, these courts vary significantly in terms of their practices, procedures, and the outcomes they produce. Why do some international courts perform better than others? Which factors affect the outcome of these courts and tribunals? The Performance of International Courts and Tribunals is an interdisciplinary study featuring approaches, methods and authorship from law and political science, which proposes the concept of performance to describe the processes and outcomes of international courts. It develops a framework for evaluating and explaining performance by offering a broad comparative analysis of international courts, covering several world regions and the areas of trade, investment, the environment, human rights and criminal law, and offers interdisciplinary accounts to explain how and why international court performance varies.
Grossman, N. (et al.) (eds.), Legitimacy and International Courts, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2018. [e-book]View this title in our link resolver Plinklet
One of the most noted developments in international law over the past twenty years is the proliferation of international courts and tribunals. They decide who has the right to exploit natural resources, define the scope of human rights, delimit international boundaries and determine when the use of force is prohibited. As the number and influence of international courts grow, so too do challenges to their legitimacy. This volume provides new interdisciplinary insights into international courts' legitimacy: what drives and undermines the legitimacy of these bodies? How do drivers change depending on the court concerned? What is the link between legitimacy, democracy, effectiveness and justice? Top international experts analyse legitimacy for specific international courts, as well as the links between legitimacy and cross-cutting themes. Failure to understand and respond to legitimacy concerns can endanger both the courts and the law they interpret and apply.
Schabas, W.A., and S. Murphy (eds.), Research Handbook on International Courts and Tribunals, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2017.View this title in our link resolver Plinklet
Since the establishment of the Permanent Court of Arbitration for international dispute resolution in 1899, the number of international courts and tribunals has multiplied and the reach of their jurisdiction has steadily expanded. By providing a synthetic overview and critical analysis of these developments from multiple perspectives, this Research Handbook both contextualizes and stimulates future research and practice in this rapidly developing field. Made up of specially commissioned chapters by leading and emerging scholars, the book takes a thematic and interpretive, system-wide and inter-jurisdictional comparative approach to the main issues, debates and controversies related to the growth of international courts and tribunals. Its review of influential international judgements traverses the areas of international peace and security law, international human rights law, international criminal law and international economic law, while also including critical reflection by practitioners. This nuanced review of the latest thinking on scholarly debates and controversies in international courts and tribunals will be both a key resource for academic researchers and a concise introduction to the subject for post-graduate students.
Benvenisti, E., and G.W. Downs, Between Fragmentation and Democracy: The Role of National and International Courts, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2017.View this title in our link resolver Plinklet
Between Fragmentation and Democracy explores the phenomenon of the fragmentation of international law and global governance following the proliferation of international institutions with overlapping jurisdictions and ambiguous boundaries. The authors argue that this problem has the potential to sabotage the evolution of a more democratic and egalitarian system and identify the structural reasons for the failure of global institutions to protect the interests of politically weaker constituencies. This book offers a comprehensive understanding of how new global sources of democratic deficits increasingly deprive individuals and collectives of the capacity to protect their interests and shape their opportunities. It also considers the role of the courts in mitigating the effects of globalization and the struggle to define and redefine institutions and entitlements. This book is an important resource for scholars of international law and international politics, as well as for public lawyers, political scientists, and those interested in judicial reform.
Alter, K.J., and L.R. Helfer (eds.), Transplanting International Courts: The Law and Politics of the Andean Tribunal of Justice, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2017.View this title in our link resolver Plinklet
Transplanting International Courts: The Law and Politics of the Andean Tribunal of Justice provides a deep, systematic investigation of the most active and successful transplant of the European Court of Justice. The Andean Tribunal is effective by any plausible definition of the term, but only in the domain of intellectual property law. Alter and Helfer explain how the Andean Tribunal established its legal authority within and beyond this intellectual property island, and how Andean judges have navigated moments of both transnational political consensus and political contestation over the goals and objectives of regional economic integration. By letting member states set the pace and scope of Andean integration, by condemning unequivocal violations of Andean rules, and by allowing for the coexistence of national legislation and supranational authority, the Tribunal has retained its fidelity to Andean law while building relationships with nationally-based administrative agencies, lawyers, and judges. Yet the Tribunals circumspect and formalist approach means that, unlike in Europe, community law is not an engine of integration. The Tribunals strategy has also limited its influence within the Andean legal system. The authors also revisit their own path-breaking scholarship on the effectiveness of international adjudication. Alter and Helfer argue that the European Court of Justice benefitted in underappreciated ways from the support of transnational jurist advocacy movements that are absent or poorly organized in the Andes and elsewhere in the world. The Andean Tribunals longevity despite these and other challenges offers guidance for international courts in other developing country contexts. Moreover, given that the Andean Community has weathered member state withdrawals and threats of exit, major economic and political crises, and the retrenchment of core policies such as the common external tariff, the Andean experience offers timely and important lessons for European international courts.
Brilmayer, L. (et al.), International Claims Commissions: Righting Wrongs after Conflict, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2017.View this title in our link resolver Plinklet
International claims commissions have, over the last few decades, established themselves as important and permanent fixtures in international adjudication. This book provides a comprehensive review and analysis of the workings and mechanics of claims commissions to assess their success and predict their utility in the future. The authors examine the legal framework of an international claims commission and the basic elements its processing procedure, as well as exploring the difficulties and challenges associated with operating costs, remedies and compliance with judgments. International claims commissions are created ad hoc to consider large numbers of complex legal claims resulting from an international upheaval, making them important international dispute resolution mechanisms. By focusing in large part on the examples set by the United Nations Claims Commissions, the Iran US Claims Tribunal, and the Eritrea Ethiopia Claims Commission, the authors assess the reasons to establish a claims commission by discussing their legal and operating structures, issues related to evidence and costs and the challenges and successes of creating them. The book concludes with a detailed analysis of lessons learnt to guide policy makers in the creation of future claims commissions.
Cremona, M. (et al.) (eds.), The European Union and International Dispute Settlement, Portland, OR, Hart Publishing, 2017.View this title in our link resolver Plinklet
This monograph explores the connections between the European Union and international dispute settlement. It highlights the legal challenges faced by the principal players in the field: namely the EU as a political actor and the Court of Justice of the EU as an international and domestic judiciary. In addition, it places the subject in its broader context of international dispute settlement, and the participation of the EU and its Member States in international disputes. It focuses on horizontal and cross-cutting themes, bringing together insights from the different sectors of trade, investment and human rights, and offering a variety of perspectives from academics, policymakers and practitioners.
Kotuby Jr., C.T., and L.A. Sobota, General Principles of Law and International Due Process: Principles and Norms Applicable in Transnational Disputes, New York, NY, Oxford University Press, 2017.View this title in our link resolver Plinklet
In 1953, Bin Cheng wrote his seminal book on general principles, identifying core legal principles common to various domestic legal systems across the globe. This monograph summarizes and analyzes the general principles of law and norms of international due process, with a particular focus on developments since Cheng's writing. The aim is to collect and distill these principles and norms in a single volume as a practical resource for international law jurists, advocates, and scholars. The information contained in this book holds considerable importance given the growth of inter-state intercourse resulting in the increased use of general principles over the past 60 years. General principles can serve as rules of decision, whether in interpreting a treaty or contract, determining causation, or ascertaining unjust enrichment. They also include a core set of procedural requirements that should be followed in any adjudicative system, such as the right to impartiality and the prohibition on fraud. Although the general principles are, by definition, basic and even rudimentary, they hold vital importance for the rule of law in international relations. They are meant not to define a rule of law, but rather the rule of law.
Gallus, N., Temporal Jurisdiction of International Tribunals, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2017.View this title in our link resolver Plinklet
The period of an international tribunal's temporal jurisdiction is the span of time during which an act must have occurred before the tribunal may consider if the act breached an obligation. There are many questions concerning this particular aspect of an international tribunal's jurisdiction: Does a tribunal have power over acts that occurred after the entry into force of the obligation allegedly breached, but before the tribunal's jurisdiction was accepted? What about acts that began before the tribunal's jurisdiction was accepted but continued after? To what extent can acts before the period of the tribunal's jurisdiction affect its decision on whether or not there is a breach through acts afterwards? The Temporal Jurisdiction of International Tribunals examines these questions in depth. Despite its importance, the temporal jurisdiction of international tribunals is not well understood. Tribunals often confuse different aspects of their jurisdiction and refuse to hear cases they should have heard, or agree to hear cases they should not. This book reduces this confusion by clarifying the different limits on the temporal jurisdiction of international tribunals and the important distinctions between those limits. The book examines the temporal limits resulting from (i) the entry into force of the obligation supposedly breached, (ii) the acceptance of the tribunal's jurisdiction, and (iii) from the period of limitation, as well as the effect of acts that occurred before these limits. Throughout the book, the author comprehensively compares decisions from a wide variety of sources, including the International Court of Justice, Human Rights Courts, World Trade Organization panels, and investment treaty tribunals.
Buggenhoudt, C., Common Interests in International Litigation: A Case Study on Natural Resource Exploitation Disputes, Cambridge, Intersentia, 2017.View this title in our link resolver Plinklet
How are common interests protected in international dispute settlement? What is the role of different courts and tribunals? Why is the case law on common interests (in)consistent? Do we need more consistency for a better protection of common interests? The study provides answers to questions that arise in international litigation as a result of an increasing recognition of common interests in this field and an ever-expanding network of specialised judicial bodies. This book studies the case law of a number of international courts, focusing on international litigation concerning natural resource exploitation. This is a theme closely linked to a number of common interests, one which has been considered by a number of courts dealing with human rights, international security, international trade, international investment, the law of the sea, and more.
Shany, Y., Questions of Jurisdiction and Admissibility before International Courts, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2016.View this title in our link resolver Plinklet
This examination of the jurisdiction of international courts and the admissibility of cases before them analyses jurisdictional and admissibility rules in light of the roles assumed by international courts in international life and in light of the roles that jurisdictional and admissibility rules play in promoting the effectiveness and legitimacy of international courts. The theory pursued views jurisdiction as a form of delegation of power (the power to exercise judicial power and decide the law) and regards admissibility as a framework for deciding upon the propriety of exercising such power. On the basis of this theoretical framework, the author critically evaluates the exercise of judicial discretion in the existing case law of a variety of international courts, distinguishing between the category-based case selection implicit in jurisdictional rules and the case-by-case analysis and selection implicit in rules on admissibility.
Beckman, R. (et al.), Promoting Compliance : The Role of Dispute Settlement and Monitoring Mechanisms in ASEAN Instruments, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2016.View this title in our link resolver Plinklet
The reputation and achievement of the ASEAN Community hinges on compliance. This seminal book discusses whether ASEAN's faith in dispute settlement and monitoring mechanisms as a means to better compliance is justified and delves into the extent to which they can facilitate ASEAN Community building. It provides the first comprehensive and systematic analysis of ASEAN's compliance with its instruments, and enables readers to see ASEAN as an organisation increasingly based on law and institutions. Readers will also learn how ASEAN balances a thin line between law and institutions on the one hand and diplomacy and realism on the other. Scholars of adjudicatory mechanisms will find this book a fascinating addition to the literature available, and it will serve as a 'go-to' reference for ASEAN state agencies.
- Cambridge University Press: Studies on International Courts and Tribunals
- iCourts Working Paper Series
- Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, European Convention for the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes (1957), by Lucius Caflisch.
- Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, Judicial Settlement of International Disputes, by Alain Pellet.
- Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes, by Alain Pellet.
- Pluricourts: Research Data on International Courts
- Oxford University Press: International Courts and Tribunal Series
- United Nations Audiovisual Library of International Law, Lecture Series on Courts and Tribunals
- United Nations Audiovisual Library of International Law, Lecture Series on Peaceful Settlement of Disputes
Flight MH17 and Legal Remedies
On 17 July 2014, Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 crashed in Donetsk Oblast, Eastern Ukraine. All 298 people on board MH17, which was en route from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, died. It claimed the lives of 193 Dutch nationals, 43 from Malaysia, and 27 from Australia. Other victims came from a variety of countries including Indonesia, the United Kingdom, Belgium, Germany and the Philippines. From the start, both the investigation into the cause of the crash and the criminal investigation into the downing of Flight MH17 were severely challenged due to the ongoing armed conflict in Eastern Ukraine between pro-Russian separatists, supported by the Russian Federation, and the Ukrainian government.Read more
Book Review: War, Peace and International Order?
This book attempts to assess the history and on-going relevance of the 1899 and 1907 Hague peace conferences, the conventions they brought into being, the institutions they established and the precedents they set. The exact legacies of the two conferences remain unclear. On the one hand, diplomatic and military historians, who cast their gaze to 1914, traditionally dismiss the events of 1899 and 1907 as insignificant footnotes on the path to the First World War. On the other, experts in international law posit that The Hague’s foremost legacy lies in the manner in which the conferences progressed the law of war and the concept and application of international justice.Read more
Building a 'Temple for Peace': the Choice of the Site
The Treaty for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, concluded on 29 July 1899, determined that the newly created Permanent Court of Arbitration was to be established at The Hague. As Andrew Carnegie’s gift of 1903 was meant primarily for the erection of a new and appealing court house and library to serve its arbiters, there could be no argument, as to where this ‘Temple for Peace’ was to be built. It should be at The Hague. But where in The Hague precisely was quite another thing.Read more
Bolivia’s Centenarian Maritime Claim before the International Court of Justice
Despite losing its maritime coast, the so-called Littoral Department, after the War of the Pacific, Bolivia has historically maintained, as a state policy, a maritime claim to Chile. The claim asks for sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean and its maritime space. The Political Constitution of 2009 established that Bolivia declares its right to access to the sea, and that its objective is to solve the problem peacefully. Therefore, on 24 April 2013, Bolivia instituted proceedings against Chile before the International Court of Justice. A guest blog by Elizabeth Santalla Vargas.Read more
Building a ‘Temple for Peace’: Inspired Advocates and a Philanthropist
Shortly after the 1899 Hague Peace Conference had ended, William T. Stead, a highly energetic and respected British journalist and pacifist who had followed the peace conference as an observer, and Andrew D. White, the American head of delegation and ambassador in Germany, convinced the Scottish-born American steel magnate and philanthropist Andrew Carnegie to finance the ‘Temple for Peace’ that was to become the Peace Palace in The Hague.Read more
ARGO and the Follow-Up: Iran and the United States
33 Years after the event, Hollywood has turned its attention to an episode that traumatized the United States for months: the seizure of the American Embassy in Tehran. As the US Embassy falls to a group of Islamist students and militants in support of the Iranian revolution and in retaliation for the USA’s sheltering of the recently deposed Shah, six diplomats slip out and seek sanctuary in the Canadian’s ambassador’s residence. It is up to the CIA’s Tony Mendez (Ben Affleck) to extract them from the country before they are discovered by the Revolutionary Guards. The plan? Create a fake movie, called Argo, and pretend they’re the crew.Read more
Shabtai Rosenne Memorial Lecture
On Thursday, 24 November the first Shabtai Rosenne Memorial Lecture, delivered by Professor Malcolm N. Shaw Q.C., Senior Fellow at the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law at the University of Cambridge, took place at the Peace Palace in The Hague, a little more than a year after Professor Rosenne’s death. In his lecture entitled, “The Peaceful Settlement of Disputes: Paradigms, Plurality and Policy”, Professor Shaw gave an overview of where he thought dispute resolution was at the moment.Read more
The Institute for Historical Justice and Reconciliation in The Hague
The Institute for Historical Justice and Reconciliation seeks to promote tolerance and reconciliation through helping scholars from different sides of a conflict work together to research and write narratives that can be shared among communities or peoples in conflict. Through this process of shared work, a better understanding of “the other” is gained by both sides.Read more
Abyei Arbitration Award
On Wednesday 22 July, the Arbitral Tribunal at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague rendered its final Award [PDF] in the case between the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) concerning the delimitation of the boundaries of the Abyei Area. The arbitration is based on an Arbitration Agreement between the Parties that was deposited with the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) on 11 July 2008.Read more
Maritime Delimitation in the Black Sea (Romania v. Ukraine)
On Tuesday 3 February 2009 the International Court of Justice (ICJ) rendered its Judgment in the case concerning Maritime Delimitation in the Black Sea (Romania v. Ukraine). A public sitting took place at 10 a.m. at the Peace Palace in The Hague, during which the President of the Court, Judge Rosalyn Higgins, read the Court’s Judgment.Read more