New Foundations of the Law of Expropriation of Alien Property

1981 ◽  
Vol 75 (3) ◽  
pp. 553-589 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rudolf Dolzer
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Academic Writing ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Negotiated Settlements ◽  
Continuous Stream ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Un General Assembly ◽  
The Law ◽  
Gray Areas

The continuous stream of resolutions of the UN General Assembly and much academic writing on the subject notwithstanding, the present state of customary international law regarding expropriation of alien property has remained obscure in its basic aspects; this is true in particular for expropriations in the context of North-South (still better described as “West-South”) relations, to which this article is primarily, but not exclusively, addressed. International courts have had no occasion to rule on fundamental issues of expropriation law in the past decades, even though these issues have been relevant to various disputes settled out of court. Eventually, however, the courts will be confronted with cases involving expropriation of alien property: given the continuing and rising importance of foreign investment, the parties involved probably will not invariably prefer negotiated settlements. It must also be recalled here that customary law has occasionally served as a reference standard in treaties and contracts. If an expropriation case were brought before an international tribunal, it could not simply rule that the law governing expropriation of alien property is in dispute and therefore no law at all is applicable. The very notion of international law precludes an argument that acknowledges the existence of “gray areas” in that law: a court could not rule that some law exists, but that it cannot be identified by judicial means.

Down the Danube: The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and the Case Concerning the GabcïKovo-Nagymaros Project

1998 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 837-854 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Reichert-Facilides
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Practical Importance ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
National Courts ◽  
International Court ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law

Over the last 30 years, the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties1 has emerged as one of the most influential instruments of modern international law. The Convention, which was adopted at the UN Conference on the Law of Treaties on 23 May 1969, entered into force on 27 January 1980 and has meanwhile been ratified by more than 80 States.2 Yet, as it does not operate retroactively,3 the scope of application is growing only slowly and its practical importance stems, rather, from the fact that the Convention is widely considered a restatement of customary international law. As early as 1971 the International Court of Justice referred to the articles governing termination for breach of treaty as a codification of the existing law on the subject.4 Since then both international tribunals and national courts have more and more habitually relied on the material provisions of the Convention to ascertain traditional rules of the law of treaties.5

scholarly journals The Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea: the 1976 New York Sessions

1977 ◽  
Vol 71 (2) ◽  
pp. 247-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernard H. Oxman
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
The Third ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The Law

The law of the sea has changed, for good or for ill. The Revised Single Negotiating Text (hereinafter RSNT) issued in the spring of 1976 may prove to be the single most important document regarding the law of the sea since the 1958 Geneva Conventions in terms of its influence on state practice, whether by way of an ultimate treaty or otherwise. Important differences will exist regarding the extent to which portions of the text are declaratory of emerging customary international law and regarding the extent to which the text must be changed to be acceptable as a universal treaty or as customary law. Indeed, difficult questions of implementation of its principles in bilateral and other arrangements are already arising. Positions taken at multilateral conferences may differ from the positions taken in other contexts. But the text will not be ignored.

scholarly journals The Dynamic Evolution of International Law – The Case for the More Purposeful Development of Customary International Law

2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 561
Author(s):  
Bill Campbell
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
New Technology ◽  
Islamic State ◽  
New Developments ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Number Of Factors ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
Self Defence

A fundamental underpinning of the ongoing relevance of international law is that of its ability to adapt and change to meet new developments and challenges including new technology, new (or newly developing) threats to both the public and the international order and newly developed practices, for example trans-border corporate and taxation practices. How then to effect that change? The timely negotiation of treaties to deal with the subject matter of these new developments and challenges would be ideal but can be difficult due to a number of factors. The answer could lie in the more purposeful and expeditious development of customary international law – that is, by taking coordinated action, and by publicising that action and its legal basis.This will not result in changes to the law of the detail that might be expected in a treaty, but it could address particular issues of moment. Indeed, individual states may well see themselves as having no option but to take action to meet time sensitive and critical aspects of new developments and global challenges either alone or in concert with others with a view to the development of a more widespread custom. Initial characterisation of some such action as "illegal but justified" (or words along those lines), whilst a contradiction in terms, does at the very least point to a real need for a change in the law. An example of such purposeful action may well be the development of the customary international law of self-defence to support the use of force against non-state actors in certain circumstances – such as the force used by a number of states against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) in Syria on the basis of the collective self-defence of Iraq.

The Law of Treaties Beyond the Vienna Convention

2011 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
Actual State ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Progressive Development ◽  
The Law ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
The Impact

This book offers an analysis of the law of treaties as it emerges from the interplay between the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and customary international law. It revisits the basic concepts underlying the provisions of the Vienna Convention, so as to determine the actual state of the law and its foreseeable development. In doing so, it examines some of the most controversial aspects of the law of treaties. The book first explores the influence exerted by the Vienna Convention on pre-existing customary law. Certain rules of the Convention which, at the time of its adoption, appeared to fall within the realm of progressive development, can now be regarded as customary international rules. Conversely, a number of provisions of the Convention, in particular those which have been the subject of subsequent codification work by the International Law Commission, have become obsolete. It then examines the impact exerted by the Vienna Convention on the development of other fields of international law, such as the law of international responsibility and the law of international organizations. The last section of the book is devoted to cross-cutting issues, with particular reference to the notion of jus cogens — a concept first used in the Vienna Convention in connection with the problem of the validity of treaties and which, afterwards, has acquired a legal significance going well beyond the Convention.

Blockade Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Phillip Drew
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
Past Century ◽  
Potential Harm ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
The Past ◽  
Current State ◽  
The Law

Grounded almost entirely in customary international law, the law of maritime blockade has defied several attempts at codification over the past century and a half. Although there is general agreement on the elements required to establish a blockade (declaration, notification, effectiveness, equal application, and non-interference with neutral ports) there is virtually no guidance in the law that outlines the requirements and responsibilities for parties to the conflict to mitigate potential harm to civilians affected through starvation and/or the deprivation of other humanitarian items. This chapter examines the current state of the law and concludes that in light of the significant discordance over the issue of humanitarian access, there is no settled customary law on these aspects of blockade law.

(Dis)solving the Chronological Paradox in Customary International Law: A Hartian Approach

2008 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Lefkowitz
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Resolution Function ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
International Legal System ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Normative Standard

As traditionally conceived, the creation of a new rule of customary international law requires that states believe the law to already require the conduct specified in the rule. Distinguishing the process whereby a customary rule comes to exist from the process whereby that customary rule becomes law dissolves this chronological paradox. Creation of a customary rule requires only that states come to believe that there exists a normative standard to which they ought to adhere, not that this standard is law. What makes the customary rule law is adherence by officials in the international legal system to a rule of recognition that treats custom as a source of valid law. Confusion over this distinction arises because in the international legal system the same agents whose beliefs give rise to a customary rule are the legal officials whose adherence to the rule of recognition leads them to deem that rule legally valid. The proposed solution to the chronological paradox employs H.L.A. Hart’s analysis of the concepts of law and a legal system, and in particular, the idea of a rule of recognition. Yet Hart famously denies the existence of a rule of recognition for international law. Hart’s denial rests on a failure to distinguish between the ontological and authoritative resolution functions of a rule of recognition, however. Once such a distinction is drawn, it can be argued that customary international law rests on a rule of recognition that serves the ontological function of making customary norms legal, though not the authoritative resolution function of settling disputes over the alleged legality of particular norms.

Case Analysis: The Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Case: The Law of Treaties

1998 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 321-344 ◽  
Author(s):  
Malgosia Fitzmaurice
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Case Analysis ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Fundamental Change ◽  
Unilateral Termination ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

The subject-matter of this article are the issues of treaty law as expounded in the Judgment in the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros case. The following problems are discussed: unilateral suspension and abandonment of obligations deriving from the binding treaty; the principle of fundamental change of circumstances; unilateral termination of a treaty; applicability of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties in this case; legal status of so-called ‘provisional solution’; impossibility of performance and material breach of treaty; the application of the principle of ‘approximate application’; and the principle pacta sunt servanda. The issues arc discussed at the background of the Drafts of the International Law Commission.

The Work of the International Law Commission, 2007–2011: Progress and Prospects

2012 ◽  
Vol 106 (2) ◽  
pp. 322-340 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald McRae
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Un General Assembly ◽  
The Law ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Transboundary Aquifers ◽  
Law Commission ◽  
The Way

On November 17, 2011, the UN General Assembly elected the members of the International Law Commission for the next five years. In the course of the quinquennium that was completed in August 2011 with the end of the sixty-third session, the Commission concluded four major topics on its agenda: the law of transboundary aquifers, the responsibility of international organizations, the effect of armed conflicts on treaties, and reservations to treaties. It was by any standard a substantial output. The beginning of a new quinquennium now provides an opportunity to assess what the Commission has achieved, to consider the way it operates, and to reflect on what lies ahead for it.

THE LIBERAL CONSTITUTION AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-149
Author(s):  
Fernando R. Tesón
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Foreign Relations ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
Trade Barriers ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Liberal Government ◽  
The Government ◽  
Improved Methods ◽  
The U.S

AbstractScholars have debated the meaning of the foreign-relations clauses in the U.S. Constitution. This essay attempts to outline the foreign-relations clauses that an ideal constitution should have. A liberal constitution must enable the government to implement a morally defensible foreign policy. The first priority is the defense of liberty. The constitution must allow the government to effectively defend persons, territory, and liberal institutions themselves. The liberal government should also contribute to the advancement of global freedom, subject to a number of conditions, especially cost. The essay recommends improved methods to incorporate treaties and customary international law into the constitutional structure. Treaties should be approved by the whole legislature and should generally be self-executing. Customary law should be genuine, not fake, and consistent with liberal principles. Finally, based on economic theory and evidence, the essay recommends that liberal constitutions prohibit the government from erecting trade barriers. It concludes by tentatively proposing concrete constitutional language to implement these recommendations.

Self-Determination during the Cold War: UN General Assembly Resolution 1514 (1960), the Prohibition of Partition, and the Establishment of the British Indian Ocean Territory (1965)

2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 419-468 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victor Kattan
Keyword(s):  
Indian Ocean ◽  
West Africa ◽  
International Law ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
South West ◽  
South West Africa ◽  
Un General Assembly

This article uses the history of partition to assess when self-determination became a rule of customary international law prohibiting partition as a method of decolonization. In so doing it revisits the partitions of Indochina, Korea, India, Palestine, Cyprus, South Africa, and South West Africa, and explains that UN practice underwent a transformation when the UN General Assembly opposed the United Kingdom’s partition proposals for Cyprus in 1958. Two years later, the UN General Assembly condemned any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country in Resolution 1514 (1960). The illegality of partition under customary international law was raised during the second phase of the South West Africa Cases (1960–1966) in respect of South Africa’s homelands policy, but the International Court of Justice (ICJ) infamously did not address the merits of those cases. The illegality of partition was also raised in the arbitration between the United Kingdom and Mauritius over the establishment of the British Indian Ocean Territory in 1965. Like the ICJ in the South West Africa Cases, the Arbitral Tribunal decided that it did not have jurisdiction to address the legality of the British excision of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius, even though the legality of the excision was argued at length between counsels for Mauritius and the United Kingdom in their oral pleadings and written statements. However, in their joint dissenting opinion, Judge Rüdiger Wolfrum and Judge James Kateka expressed their opinion that self-determination had developed before 1965, and that consequently the partition was unlawful. This paper agrees that selfdetermination prohibited the partition of Mauritius to establish the British Indian Ocean Territory, a new colony, in 1965 although self-determination probably did not emerge as a rule of customary international law until the adoption of the human rights covenants in 1966, after the excision of the Chagos Archipelago in 1965, but before the passage of the Mauritius Independence Act in 1968.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document