PROPORTIONALITY: WTO LAW: IN COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE
In: Texas international law journal, Band 42, Heft 3, S. 371-428
ISSN: 0163-7479
855 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Texas international law journal, Band 42, Heft 3, S. 371-428
ISSN: 0163-7479
In: 26 Columbia Journal of Gender and Law 123-181 (2013)
SSRN
In: Law & ethics of human rights, Band 4, Heft 2, S. 231-242
ISSN: 1938-2545
Across a broad range of subjects, there is now wide agreement that the principle of proportionality governs the extent to which a provocation may lawfully be countered by what might otherwise be an unlawful response. That is the central role assigned to proportionality in international law and it is deeply rooted in the cultural history of societies. However, if the core institutions of a legal system are too weak to be relied upon to take remedial action against wrongdoers, then they must at least be authorized to license appropriate action by the wronged party and to insure that its response remains within prescribed parameters.The practice described in this essay demonstrates that a high degree of accord is emerging across a broad range of issues to the appropriate standards by which the proportionality of countermeasures can be assessed. The practice of various institutions authorized to render second opinions as to the compliance with those standards is gradually narrowing the range of indeterminacy inherent in the term proportionality. Some of this case law has been disappointingly episodic. The well-crafted second opinion, through its precision, its invocation of precedent, and its careful weighing of the probity of the facts presented to it, deepens and narrows the jurisprudential stream while strengthening its embankments.If applied in practice through second opinions rendered by legitimate institutions, proportionality is an example of an indeterminate principle becoming gradually empowered to provide persuasive answers to difficult questions and, thereby, case by case, building the objective determinacy of the principle.
In: LSE Legal Studies Working Paper No. 03/2022
SSRN
In: Journal of international economic law, Band 4, Heft 3, S. 441-480
ISSN: 1464-3758
In: COMPARATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, 2d ed., Susan Rose-Ackerman, Peter L. Lindseth & Blake Emerson, eds., Edward Elgar Publishing, 2017
SSRN
In: Proportionality in Private Law, pp. 15-32, Franz Bauer, Ben Köhler, eds., Mohr Siebeck, May 2023
SSRN
In: Marine corps gazette: the Marine Corps Association newsletter, Band 87, Heft 9, S. 60-62
ISSN: 0025-3170
In: 15 LAW & BUSINESS 337 (2012)
SSRN
SSRN
In: American journal of international law: AJIL, Band 87, Heft 3, S. 391-413
ISSN: 2161-7953
Proportionality is a fundamental component of the law on the use of force and the law of armed conflict—the jus ad bellum and the jus in bello. In the former, it refers to a belligerent's response to a grievance and, in the latter, to the balance to be struck between the achievement of a military goal and the cost in terms of lives. The legitimate resort to force under the United Nations system is regarded by most commentators as restricted to the use of force in self-defense under Article 51 and collective security action under chapter VII of the UN Charter. The resort to force in both these situations is limited by the customary law requirement that it be proportionate to the unlawful aggression that gave rise to the right. In the law of armed conflict, the notion of proportionality is based on the fundamental principle that belligerents do not enjoy an unlimited choice of means to inflict damage on the enemy. Since the entry into force of Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts, proportionality has been both a conventional and a customary principle of the law of armed conflict.
In: Legal issues of economic integration: law journal of the Europa Instituut and the Amsterdam Center for International Law, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Band 35, Heft 3, S. 259-268
ISSN: 1566-6573, 1875-6433
In: Legal issues of economic integration: law journal of the Europa Instituut and the Amsterdam Center for International Law, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Band 35, Heft 3, S. 283-294
ISSN: 1566-6573, 1875-6433
In: American journal of international law, Band 87, Heft 3, S. 391-413
ISSN: 0002-9300
World Affairs Online
In: The Judge and the Proportionate Use of Discretion (Routledge, 2015)
SSRN