Suchergebnisse

Customary international law is based on State practice. This book presents the international law practice of Germany, the world's fourth-largest economy and powerhouse of the European Union, which makes an important contribution to the creation and development of customary international law. It is the first and only presentation of German practice in international law in English. The book combines a case study approach, providing analysis and commentary on Germany's practice, with a classic digest of primary materials, including diplomatic correspondence, statements, and court decisions. The book is an ideal complement to other compilations of international law practice and is an essential resource for scholars and practitioners of international law. It will also be of interest to scholars of international relations, politics, and diplomatic studies.

This book critically engages with each step of the proceedings in the South China Sea landmark arbitration case, showing that the Arbitral Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to decide the case and that several of the claims presented were also inadmissible.

Customary international law is based on State practice. This book presents the international law practice of Germany, the world's fourth-largest economy and a powerhouse of the European Union. That practice makes an important contribution to the creation and development of customary international law. It is the first and only presentation in English of German practice in the field of international law. The 2019 volume also provides comprehensive coverage of Germany's membership of the United Nations Security Council. The book combines a case study approach, providing analysis and commentary on Germany's practice, with a classic digest of primary materials, including diplomatic correspondence, statements and court decisions. The book is an ideal complement to other compilations of international law practice and is an essential resource for scholars and practitioners of international law. It will also be of interest to scholars of international relations, politics and diplomatic studies.

Introduction -- The South China Sea arbitration : is there a case to answer? / Stefan Talmon -- Issues of jurisdiction in cases of default of appearance / Michael Sheng-ti Gau -- The issue of admissibility in inter-state arbitration / Bing Bing Jia -- Jurisprudential tenability of the Philippines v China arbitration on South China Sea disputes / Haiwen Zhang and Chenxi Mi -- Annexes.

Die Forderung der CSU, Migranten, die bereits in einem anderen EU-Mitgliedsstaat als Asylsuchende registriert wurden, direkt an der Grenze zurückzuweisen, ist zum Teil auf scharfe Kritik gestoßen. Dana Schmalz schreibt in ihrem Beitrag "Weshalb man Asylsuchende nicht an der Grenze abweisen kann" unter anderem, dass der Zurückweisung von Flüchtlingen an der Grenze auch die Genfer Flüchtlingskonvention (GFK) entgegenstehe. Insbesondere solle sich aufgrund der rein deklaratorischen Natur der Anerkennung als Flüchtling und dem Refoulement-Verbot aus der GFK eine Verpflichtung ergeben, selbst solche Personen vorläufig aufzunehmen, bei denen sich später herausstellt, dass sie keinen Schutzanspruch als Flüchtling haben. Dieser Ansicht soll im Folgenden eine etwas andere – mehr positivistische – Lesart der Konvention gegenübergestellt werden.

AbstractThis article shows that the Tribunal in the Chagos Marine Protected Area Arbitration between Mauritius and the United Kingdom has contributed considerably to the creeping expansion of compulsory jurisdiction of courts and tribunals established under Part XV of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The Tribunal has employed three techniques to do so. First, it has read down the jurisdictional precondition to exchange views in Article 283(1) of the UNCLOS; second, it has expanded the limited scope of compulsory subject-matter jurisdiction under section 2 of Part XV by broadening the meaning of the phrase 'any dispute concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention' to include incidental, related—and through the backdoor of a balancing exercise—even extraneous disputes; and, third, it has restricted the limitations and exceptions to compulsory jurisdiction in Articles 297 and 298 of the UNCLOS. Few would have predicted in 1982 that a Part XV court or tribunal would—within the context of such a balancing exercise—ever find that a colonial era undertaking created binding legal obligations under international law and that the United Kingdom was obliged to return the Chagos Archipelago to Mauritius when no longer needed for defence purposes. The Tribunal's expansive reading of the jurisdictional provisions in Part XV opens up the possibility of future rulings, albeit incidentally, on issues that have little to do with the law of the sea.