Comparative reasoning in international courts and tribunals
In: Cambridge studies in international and comparative law 145
16 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Cambridge studies in international and comparative law 145
In: Netherlands international law review: NILR ; international law - conflict of laws, Band 69, Heft 2, S. 221-239
ISSN: 1741-6191
AbstractIn what way do Articles 31 and 32 of the VCLT constitute 'rules' of interpretation? In this article, I explore whether these provisions might be considered to be 'disciplining rules', to use Owen Fiss' terminology. Such rules perform both directive and evaluative roles, guiding the interpreter as well as acting as a benchmark against which to evaluate interpretation. Yet, both the history and the practice of the VCLT provisions suggest that Articles 31 and 32 sit uneasily with the concept of disciplining rules. Instead, I suggest that they might better be thought of as rules in a looser, non-legal sense of the term, adherence to which signals membership to a certain community.
In: New York University Journal of International Law and Politics (JILP), Forthcoming
SSRN
Working paper
In: (2018) 9 Journal of International Dispute Settlement 654
SSRN
In: Hague Yearbook of International Law (Forthcoming)
SSRN
In: Cambridge Law Journal (Forthcoming)
SSRN
In: (2013) 84 British Yearbook of International Law 271
SSRN
In: 1 LSU Journal of Energy Law and Resources 43 (2012)
SSRN
In: Yale Journal of International Law, Forthcoming
SSRN
In: P Merkouris & D Peat, 'Final Report: The Interpretative Practice of the PCIJ/ ICJ' (ILA, 79th Biennial Conference, Kyoto, 2020) (available here: https://ila.vettoreweb.com/Storage/Download.aspx?DbStorageId=24296&StorageFileGuid=9a6e74e1-a462-42f5-904d-813f34ab42b8) TRICI-Law Research Paper Series
SSRN
In: Journal of World Investment and Trade (Forthcoming)
SSRN
In: International journal of human resource management, Band 34, Heft 17, S. 3401-3429
ISSN: 1466-4399
In: F Pazartzis, G Ulfstein, P Merkouris & D Peat, 'Final Report of the ILA Study Group on the Content and Evolution of the Rules of Interpretation' (ILA, 79th Biennial Conference, Kyoto, 2020) (available here: https://ila.vettoreweb.com/Storage/Download.aspx?DbStorageId=24298&StorageFileGuid=2e276)
SSRN
In: Journal of international economic law, Band 27, Heft 1, S. 70-92
ISSN: 1464-3758
Abstract
The ability to ensure compliance with investor-state arbitral awards is often regarded as one of the strengths of the international investment regime. Yet, there have been few systematic studies of compliance to assess the extent to which states have actually complied with adverse investor-state compensation awards. This paper presents a new dataset that enables empirical research on compliance with these decisions; it is the first publicly available dataset to focus on what happens after awards are handed down, and in this way complements other databases on international investment law. This paper explains the data collection process (and its associated challenges), discusses the design choices made in selecting inputs and variables, presents a descriptive overview of the data, and examines how variables can be used in future research. Moreover, various cases are used as illustrations of the challenges of collecting and coding data on post-award processes and we explore what missing data can tell us about compliance dynamics.