Jurisdiction following seizure or arrest in violation of international law
In: American journal of international law, Band 28, S. 231-245
ISSN: 0002-9300
33943 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: American journal of international law, Band 28, S. 231-245
ISSN: 0002-9300
In: American journal of international law: AJIL, Band 28, Heft 2, S. 231-245
ISSN: 2161-7953
It is well settled in Anglo-American law that national courts are
competent, in general, to adjudicate rights and duties with respect to all
things or persons found within the territory which the process of the court
controls. Exceptions find an especial justification in considerations of
national or international convenience. A situation which seems to have been
insufficiently considered, however, is presented by the case of the thing or
person which has been seized or arrested abroad, in violation of
international law, and brought within the state and thus within reach of the
process of the state's courts. Should the courts be considered competent, on
the basis of physical presence thus procured, to adjudicate in the usual
way?
In: Journal of Comparative Legislation and International Law, Band 20, S. 99-104
In: Proceedings of the annual meeting / American Society of International Law, Band 38, S. 40-60
ISSN: 2169-1118
In: American journal of international law: AJIL, Band 34, Heft 1, S. 112-116
ISSN: 2161-7953
In: American journal of international law, Band 29, S. 437-651
ISSN: 0002-9300
In: Journal of Comparative Legislation and International Law, Band 21, S. 198-204
In: American journal of international law: AJIL, Band 30, Heft 2, S. 233-255
ISSN: 2161-7953
The problem of jurisdiction is of even greater importance in international law than it is in the domain of municipal law. This may easily be understood because, up to the present, no international tribunal has been furnished with obligatory jurisdiction binding upon all States. In consequence, the judicial settlement of many international disputes depends upon the preliminary question whether any tribunal has jurisdiction over the case. Although since the foundation of the Permanent Court of International Justice at The Hague a tribunal invested with a very comprehensive jurisdiction exists, it is, nevertheless, significant that in many cases before the Permanent Court a plea to the jurisdiction has been raised with the obvious intention of preventing a legal decision on the merits.
In: American journal of international law: AJIL, Band 29, Heft 2, S. 237-247
ISSN: 2161-7953
It is now an established principle of modern international law, that there exists in every independent State but one body of law. This body of law is administered by all the courts alike over all persons and things within its territorial limits. These courts, within the limits of their respective jurisdictions, do not discriminate between the various inhabitants of the State. The origin, nationality or religion of the people who appear before the courts is not questioned, and is not of any importance.
In: American journal of international law, Band 30, S. 233-255
ISSN: 0002-9300
In: American journal of international law, Band 29, S. 237-247
ISSN: 0002-9300
In: American journal of international law, Band 35, S. 519-523
ISSN: 0002-9300
In: American journal of international law: AJIL, Band 29, Heft S1, S. 480-508
ISSN: 2161-7953
In: American journal of international law: AJIL, Band 30, Heft 3, S. 494-495
ISSN: 2161-7953