Tierschutz im Schnittfeld von nationalem und internationalem Recht: tierschutzrechtliche Eingriffs-, Einfuhr-, Haltungs- und Ausstellungsverbote im Lichte von Verfassungs-, Gemeinschafts- und Völkerrecht
In: Schriftenreihe der Hochschule Speyer 135
2145064 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Schriftenreihe der Hochschule Speyer 135
In: Human rights law review, Band 23, Heft 4
ISSN: 1744-1021
Abstract
The article deals with the question of whether and why international human rights law should protect corporations at the example of regional economic integration systems such as the European Union. For the European Court of Justice, granting human rights to corporations is the natural response to the key role that private companies play in the integration program. Regional human rights courts, in contrast, partly struggle to recognise corporations as human rights holders. The article critically examines the theoretical raison d'être of fundamental rights of corporations, granted in the framework of international human rights, and reflects on them on the basis of a Rule of Law-postulate.
Blog: Ideas on Europe
A UACES Microgrant Report Europe has been facing a decade of crises. From the financial and refugee crises of the early and mid-2010s, to the Covid pandemic opening the new decade and the looming threat of climate change. These are some of the recurrent topics at the CES 29th International Conference of Europeanists, hosted […]
The post CES 29th International Conference of Europeanists – Europe's Past, Present and Future: Utopias and Dystopias appeared first on Ideas on Europe.
In: American journal of international law: AJIL, Band 93, Heft 2, S. 507-514
ISSN: 2161-7953
United States—Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products.World Trade Organization, Appellate Body, October 12, 1998.In May 1996, the United States effectively prohibited imports of shrimp and shrimp products from all countries that do not require commercial shrimp trawlers to use turtle-excluder devices (TEDs) to permit endangered species of sea turtles to escape from trawling nets to avoid drowning. In January 1997, India, Malaysia, Pakistan and Thailand requested that the WTO Dispute Settlement Body establish a panel to determine whether this import ban, among other things, violates the prohibition on quantitative restrictions in Article XI of GATT (1994). The United States maintained that its import ban was permitted under the exceptions set forth in paragraphs (b) and (g) of GATT Article XX. Four turtle species that migrate in and out of waters subject to the complaining parties' jurisdiction are listed as endangered under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora and are covered by the relevant U.S. regulation.
International audience The regime of international responsibility of States has been questioned by philosophers of international law. Their main critique pertains to the fairness of the burden of its implementation on blameless individuals in that State, and especially to the fairness of their secondary (mostly financial) liability under domestic or international law (e.g., through taxation in order to pay war reparations). This has been coined the Individualist Challenge to State responsibility. This essay starts by debunking that challenge, before taking the discussion a step further to discuss a related (albeit yet unmade) argument of fairness that one may refer to, by analogy, as the Statist Argument. The Statist Argument would endorse the fairness of the current regime of international responsibility of international organizations (IOs), and in particular the absence of secondary liability of member States of a responsible IO. Addressing the Individualist Challenge and Statist Argument together, and understanding why regimes of international responsibility law and our moral intuitions about them each pull in different directions, are the two aims of this essay. The essay turns the Statist Argument on its head and argues that secondary liabilities of member States actually amount to a requirement of fairness to the individuals in those States. It thereby contributes to taking further the debate about the reform of IO responsibility law by drawing on arguments in moral and political philosophy, on the one hand, and does so from the integrative perspective of the moral interests of the individual by discussing both State and IO responsibility law together, on the other ; Rivista di filosofia del diritto (ISSN 2280-482X) Fascicolo 1, giugno 2017 Ente di afferenza: Università statale di Milano (unimi) Copyright c by Società editrice il Mulino, Bologna. Tutti i diritti sono riservati. Per altre informazioni si veda https://www.rivisteweb.it Licenza d'uso L'articoloè messo a disposizione dell'utente in licenza per ...
BASE
In: INSEAD Working Paper No. 2022/30/MKT
SSRN
SSRN
SSRN
Working paper
In: forthcoming 2018 U. ILL. L. REV. ONLINE __.
SSRN
In: iCourts Working Paper Series No. 87
SSRN
In: BENELEX Working Paper N. 8
SSRN
Working paper
In: Bocconi Legal Papers no. 8 (2016), pp. 107-130.
SSRN
In: Collection Contextes