Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law

1993 ◽  
Vol 87 (3) ◽  
pp. 433-441
Author(s):  
Marian Nash
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Buenos Aires ◽  
The United States ◽  
George Bush ◽  
Argentine Republic ◽  
Contemporary Practice

On January 19, 1993, President George Bush transmitted to the Senate for its advice and consent to ratification the Treaty Between the United States of America and the Argentine Republic Concerning the Reciprocal Encouragement and Protection of Investment, with Protocol, signed at Washington on November 14, 1991, and an amendment to the Protocol effected by exchange of notes at Buenos Aires on August 24 and November 6, 1992.

Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law

1993 ◽  
Vol 87 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-111
Author(s):  
Marian Nash
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
George Bush ◽  
Environment And Development ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Contemporary Practice

On September 8, 1992, President George Bush transmitted to the Senate for advice and consent to ratification the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, adopted at New York on May 9, 1992, by the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for a Framework Convention on Climate Change and signed on behalf of the United States at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro on June 12, 1992.

Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law

1962 ◽  
Vol 56 (4) ◽  
pp. 1027-1032
Author(s):  
Josef L. Kunz
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Atomic Energy ◽  
Argentine Republic ◽  
The Government ◽  
Contemporary Practice

Pursuant to §123 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, 68 Stat. 940 (1954), as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2153 (1959), the Agreement with the Government of the Argentine Republic Concerning the Civil Uses of Atomic Energy, June 22, 1962, T.I.A.S., No. 5125, required that materials transferred pursuant to that Agreement remain within the jurisdiction of the Government of the Argentine Republic or of a country with which the United States has an Agreement for co-operation.

Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law

1996 ◽  
Vol 90 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-93
Author(s):  
Marian Nash ◽  
(Leich)
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Foreign Minister ◽  
The United States ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Socialist Republic ◽  
Secretary Of State ◽  
Contemporary Practice

By notes exchanged at a signing ceremony in Hanoi, Vietnam, on August 5, 1995, Secretary of State Warren Christopher and Vietnamese Foreign Minister Nguyen Manh Cam confirmed the establishment of diplomatic relations between the United States of America and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam by mutual consent on July 12, 1995.

How May Tribunals Apply the Customary Necessity Rule to the Argentine Cases? An Analysis of ICSID Decisions with Respect to the Interaction between Article XI of the U.S.-Argentina BIT and the Customary Rule of Necessity

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
El-Hage Javier
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
The United States ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Specific Focus ◽  
Argentine Republic ◽  
The Face ◽  
The U.S

This chapter addresses the question of why the nine decisions from the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) arising under the treaty between the United States of America and the Argentine Republic concerning the reciprocal encouragement and protection of investment have been so inconsistent in the face of largely undisputed facts and identical legal norms. It first sets forth, in abstract, a set of interpretive parameters and corresponding legal rationales that may be followed by tribunals when dealing with situations in which treaty and customary international law rules interact. It then analyzes each of the Argentine decisions according to the interaction rationales chosen by tribunals and committees, with a specific focus on the consistency of their own arguments for the application of the rule of necessity of customary international law.

Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law

1993 ◽  
Vol 87 (2) ◽  
pp. 258-281
Author(s):  
Marian Nash
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
The United States ◽  
George Bush ◽  
Ballistic Missiles ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Contemporary Practice ◽  
Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles ◽  
President Bush

On January 15, 1993, President George Bush transmitted to the Senate for advice and consent to ratification the Treaty Between the United States of America and the Russian Federation on Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (the START II Treaty), signed at Moscow on January 3, 1993. In his letter of transmittal, President Bush discussed the importance of the Treaty, in major part as follows:The START II Treaty is a milestone in the continuing effort by the United States and the Russian Federation to address the threat posed by strategic offensive nuclear weapons, especially multiple-warhead ICBMs [intercontinental ballistic missiles]. It builds upon and relies on the Treaty Between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (the START Treaty) signed at Moscow on July 31, 1991. At the same time, the START II Treaty goes even further than the START Treaty.

Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law

1997 ◽  
Vol 91 (3) ◽  
pp. 493-517
Author(s):  
Marian Nash (Leich)
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Hong Kong ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
People’S Republic Of China ◽  
People's Republic Of China ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
The Government ◽  
Contemporary Practice

On March 3,1997, President William J. Clinton transmitted to the Senate for its advice and consent to ratification as a treaty the Agreement Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of Hong Kong for the Surrender of Fugitive Offenders, signed at Hong Kong on December 20,1996. In his letter of transmittal, President Clinton pointed out that, upon its entry into force, the Agreement would “enhance cooperation between the law enforcement communities of the United States and Hong Kong, and … provide a framework and basic protections for extraditions after the reversion of Hong Kong to the sovereignty of the People’s Republic of China on July 1, 1997.” The President continued: Given the absence of an extradition treaty with the People’s Republic of China, this Treaty would provide the means to continue an extradition relationship with Hong Kong after reversion and avoid a gap in law enforcement. It will thereby make a significant contribution to international law enforcement efforts.The provisions of this Agreement follow generally the form and content of extradition treaties recently concluded by the United States. In addition, the Agreement contains several provisions specially designed in light of the particular status of Hong Kong. The Agreement’s basic protections for fugitives are also made expressly applicable to fugitives surrendered by the two parties before the new treaty enters into force.

Różne perspektywy dotyczące skutków art. 95 CISG

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Małgorzata Danuta Pohl-Michałek
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Democratic Republic ◽  
The United States ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
International Sale Of Goods ◽  
Conflict Of Law

The 1980 United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) was adopted in order to provide uniform rules governing the international sale of goods. It has already been ratified by an impressive number of 92 Contracting States, with the major trading countries taking the lead. The CISG applies to contracts for the sale of goods between parties whose places of business are in different States, where the States are CISG Contracting States (Article 1(1)(a)). Moreover, it applies to contracts for the sale of goods when the contracting parties have their places of business in different States and when the rules of private international law lead to the application of the law of a CISG Contracting State (Article 1(1)(b)). However, at the time of ratification, the prospective Contracting States are given the possibility of making additional reservations, including one set out in Article 95 CISG, which limits the application of Article 1(1)(b) of the Convention. Although there are some CISG Contracting States that initially applied the reservation but have since withdrawn it, there are still a few Contracting States where the reservation remains[1], including the two largest trading countries – China and the United States. The paper presents various approaches regarding the interpretation of the effects of the reservation set out in Article 95 CISG, which in fact challenge the principle of the uniform interpretation and application of the Convention’s provisions. The author argues that the Article 95 CISG reservation leads to increased confusion and problematic conflict of law issues that bring more chaos than benefits.   [1] The remaining Article 95 CISG Reservatory States are: Armenia, China, the Lao People's Democratic Republic, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Singapore, Slovakia and the United States of America. Information is based on the official website: https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=X-10&chapter=10 (accessed: 9.12.2019).

Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law

1997 ◽  
Vol 91 (2) ◽  
pp. 325-348
Author(s):  
Marian Nash Leich
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Conventional Weapons ◽  
Contemporary Practice

On January 7, 1997, President William J. Clinton transmitted to the Senate for advice and consent to ratification the following Protocols to the 1980 Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects: (A) the amended Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-traps and Other Devices, adopted at Geneva on May 3, 1996 (Protocol II, or amended Mines Protocol); (B) the Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons, adopted at Geneva on October 10, 1980 (Protocol III, or the Incendiary Weapons Protocol) ; and (C) the Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons, adopted at Geneva on May 3, 1996 (Protocol IV).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document