To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property.
Journal articles on the topic 'United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 34 journal articles for your research on the topic 'United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Dickinson, Andrew. "Status of Forces under the UN Convention on State Immunity." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 55, no. 2 (April 2006): 427–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/iclq/lei090.
Full textAbstract:
The United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 2 December 2004.1 The General Assembly recorded, in the first paragraph of its resolution adopting the Convention, its ‘deep appreciation to the International Law Commission and the Ad Hoc Committee on jurisdictional Immunities of States and their Property for their valuable work on the law of jurisdictional immunities of States and their property’. Whatever view one takes as to the merits of the Convention text or the prospects of its success,2 it cannot be doubted that this acknowledgment was well deserved—it is, if anything, an understatement to describe the conclusion of a detailed international instrument on state immunity, embodying the restrictive theory of immunity, as a ‘diplomatic triumph’.
2
Stewart, David P. "United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property." International Legal Materials 44, no. 4 (July 2005): 801–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020782900011633.
Full text
3
Hafner, Gerhard, and Ulrike Köhler. "The United Nations Convention on jurisdictional immunities of states and their property." Netherlands Yearbook of International Law 35, no. -1 (October 21, 2005): 3. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0167676804000030.
Full text
4
Banh, Tuan Quoc. "BASIS FOR PROPOSAL OF ENFORCEMENT OF THE FOREIGN SOVEREIGN IMMUNITIES ACT IN VIETNAM." Science and Technology Development Journal 17, no. 4 (December 31, 2014): 112–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.32508/stdj.v17i4.1548.
Full textAbstract:
Through analyzing the formation and development of doctrine of state immunity and the international experience in creating laws to concretize the contents of immunity right, such as the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and their Property 2004 and national act of typical nations in the world, the author clarifies theoretical basis for the creation of the foreign sovereign immunities act in Vietnam as well as proposes some fundamental issues concerning the content of the act.
5
Webb, Philippa. "Should the 2004 un State Immunity Convention serve as a model/starting point for a future un Convention on the Immunity of International Organizations?" International Organizations Law Review 10, no. 2 (June 20, 2014): 319–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15723747-01002005.
Full textAbstract:
This paper argues that the 2004 United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and their Property should not serve as a model for a new convention with regard to international organizations. It has been suggested that there would be some advantages in preparing a draft convention on the jurisdictional immunity of international organizations: it would make the law governing the immunities of international organizations more ‘easily ascertainable’; a convention would progressively develop the law; and it would make a useful counterpart and parallel convention to the 2004 convention. However, this paper contends that each of these reasons — while appealing from the perspective of harmonization and a notion of an accessible and predictable international ‘rule of law’ — does not overcome the problems of principle, practice and precedent. However, the immunities afforded to State officials may have greater value as a model for the immunities of officials of international organizations.
6
Banh, Tuan Quoc. "THE JOINING INTO THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON JURISDICTIONAL IMMUNITIES OF STATES AND THEIR PROPERTY 2004 OF VIETNAM." Science and Technology Development Journal 15, no. 1 (March 22, 2020): 67–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.32508/stdj.v15i1.1784.
Full textAbstract:
By summarizing the main contents of the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and their Property on 2nd December 2004, the author has analyzed actual and theory aspects on the necessity of Vietnam’s joining this Convention in order to protect interests of Vietnam State in the setting that these days the State and economic sectors are participating much in trading, commercial and investment activities with foreign subjects, and contribute to improving Vietnam legislations during international globalization.
7
JURATOWITCH, Ben. "Waiver of State Immunity and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards." Asian Journal of International Law 6, no. 2 (February 13, 2015): 199–232. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s204425131400040x.
Full textAbstract:
If a state has waived state immunity by agreement with a non-state entity in advance of court proceedings brought by that entity to enforce an arbitral award against that state, then the enforcement court should give effect to the waiver. That is the opposite of what the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal decided in Democratic Republic of the Congo v. FG Hemisphere, but it is the approach reflected in the 2004 United Nations Convention on the Jurisdictional Immunities of States and their Property. After examining that Hong Kong case and that United Nations Convention, this paper considers the position in various jurisdictions. The prevalent position is in general terms that consent to arbitration usually constitutes waiver of state immunity from jurisdiction of a court to recognize the arbitral award as creating a debt binding on the state, but usually does not constitute waiver of state immunity from execution of that debt against the assets of the state. The conclusion of the paper includes a model waiver of state immunity from jurisdiction and from execution.
8
Blumrosen, Alexander, and Fleur Malet-Deraedt. "NML Capital Ltd. v. Republic of Argentina." American Journal of International Law 107, no. 3 (July 2013): 638–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.5305/amerjintelaw.107.3.0638.
Full textAbstract:
In three cases decided on the same day, the French Court of Cassation held that the provisional attachments of funds belonging to the Republic of Argentina by NML Capital Ltd. (NML) were void on the ground of sovereign immunity from enforcement because the funds were intended to finance state noncommercial activities and had not been subject to an express waiver of immunity by Argentina. These cases are the first judicial application by the Court of Cassation of the 2004 United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property (2004 UN Convention), which France signed on January 17, 2007, and ratified on June 28, 2011.
9
Garnett, Richard. "STATE AND DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITY AND EMPLOYMENT RIGHTS: EUROPEAN LAW TO THE RESCUE?" International and Comparative Law Quarterly 64, no. 4 (August 24, 2015): 783–827. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020589315000366.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThe issues of State and diplomatic immunity in cases involving persons employed by foreign States in embassies or consulates or engaged directly by diplomats remain controversial. The focus of this article is on recent developments in European law, in particular under the European Convention on Human Rights, the Brussels I Regulation and the Charter of the European Union, the effect of which has been to enhance the rights of employees of foreign States. Analysis is also made of the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and their Property and the current domestic practice of States with the aim of identifying the present international law standard on State immunity and embassy and consular employment. Employees of diplomats, however, remain inadequately protected and this article considers possible strategies for improving their position.
10
Barker, J. Craig. "Negotiating the Complex Interface between State Immunity and Human Rights: An Analysis of the International Court of Justice Decision in Germany v. Italy." International Community Law Review 15, no. 4 (2013): 415–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/18719732-12341262.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract One of the most controversial areas of contemporary international law is the interface between immunities and human rights. International immunities have been successfully challenged on human rights grounds in certain jurisdictions. However, to date, no international court tribunal has endorsed such challenges. In its judgment in Germany v. Italy the International Court of Justice re-asserted the conservative approach to the relationship between State immunity and human rights, which rejects the claim that State immunity is “trumped” by hierarchically superior human rights norms. This article examines the Court’s reasoning, before turning to consider the alternative vision of the interface between State immunity and human rights presented by Judge Cinçado Trindade. While persuasive, Trindade’s analysis must ultimately be rejected. The overtly positivist and formalistic approach of the Court, which is itself open to criticism, was, nevertheless, necessitated by the failure of States to provide for a human rights exception in the United Nations Convention on the Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property 2004, signifying a strong opinio juris against the further limitation of State immunity at the present time. Nevertheless, the Court carefully sought to limit the effects of its judgment by limiting its focus to the specific questions before it.
11
Motzfeldt Kravik, Andreas. "State Immunity in Norwegian Courts." Nordic Journal of International Law 90, no. 4 (October 12, 2021): 435–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718107-90030003.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The article seeks to clarify the scope of state immunity in civil proceedings before Norwegian courts based on recent jurisprudence and other sources of law, both domestic and international. While the concept of restrictive state immunity is now widely seen as settled law, determining the boundaries between government and private acts, and thus the precise scope of state immunity, is inherently challenging. The article examines recent Norwegian case law on state immunity, highlighting commonalities and inconsistencies in the jurisprudence, including with respect to the courts’ reliance on the 2004 United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property, which Norway has ratified. The article concludes that the 2004 Convention has, in whole or in part, achieved customary law status and represents a major step forward towards a truly global framework within which national courts can adjudicate state immunity. The article concludes that future cases on state immunity before Norwegian courts should be adjudicated on the basis of the 2004 Convention.
12
Yee, Sienho. "Roger O’Keefe and Christian J. Tams, The United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property: A Commentary." Chinese Journal of International Law 18, no. 1 (March 1, 2019): 209–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/chinesejil/jmz007.
Full text
13
Fachri, Ferinda Khairunissa, Fitria Fitria, and Diana Mutia Habibaty. "Pemutusan Hubungan Kerja Lokal Dipekerjakan Oleh Perwakilan Negara Asing Di Indonesia." JOURNAL of LEGAL RESEARCH 4, no. 5 (August 1, 2022): 1117–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.15408/jlr.v4i5.22298.
Full textAbstract:
This thesis focuses on employment termination conflicts between Indonesians and FCRs. Foreign Country Representatives argued that the Indonesia Industrial Relations Court lacks the authority to decide a quo issue since it has diplomatic and state immunity. This study uses normative legal approach and international and domestic law as sources. The 1961 Vienna Convention and the 1963 Vienna Convention, the International Labor Organization's Termination of Employment Convention 1982, and the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property 2005 are the primary sources of international law, while Indonesia's national laws are the Code of Civil Law, Act Number 2 of 2004 on Settlement of Industrial Relations (PPHI), Act Number 11 of 2020 on Job Creation, and a few others. The research also reviews three court decisions on Foreign Country Representatives' termination of employment with Indonesians and compares them to the aforementioned laws. This study found that terminated local employees can sue in Industrial Relations Court. Due to the defendants being foreign state representatives, the case must also comply with the employees' and Foreign Country representations' agreement (e.g. Embassy, Consulate). The Agreement between the two nations controls the Industrial Relations Court's authority in disputes involving Indonesian (local) workers and foreign country representations in Indonesia, as well as court judgements.
14
McCaffrey, Stephen C. "The Forty-third Session of the International Law Commission." American Journal of International Law 85, no. 4 (October 1991): 703–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2203277.
Full textAbstract:
The forty-third session of the United Nations International Law Commission (ILC) was held in Geneva from April 29 to July 19, 1991, and was chaired by Ambassador Abdul Koroma of Sierra Leone. During the session, the last of the ILC’s current five-year term of office, the Commission adopted full sets of draft articles on three of the subjects on its agenda. It completed the second reading, or final adoption, of the draft on jurisdictional immunities of states and their property, and approved on first reading its articles on the law of the non-navigational uses of international watercourses, and the Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind. In its report to the General Assembly, the Commission recommended that the Assembly convene a diplomatic conference charged with concluding a convention on the basis of the draft articles on jurisdictional immunities. The drafts on watercourses and crimes were sent to governments for their comments, which the Commission requested they submit by January 1, 1993. The ILC will then give each of those drafts a second reading, taking into account the observations received from states. In addition to the progress made on these topics, the Commission considered reports on the three remaining subjects on its agenda: international liability for injurious consequences arising out of acts not prohibited by international law, relations between states and international organizations (second part of the topic) and state responsibility.
15
McCaffrey, Stephen C. "The Forty-First Session of the International Law Commission." American Journal of International Law 83, no. 4 (October 1989): 937–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2203386.
Full textAbstract:
The International Law Commission of the United Nations held its 41st session from May 2 to July 21, 1989, under the Chairmanship of Professor Bernhard Graefrath. The most noteworthy achievement of the session was the completion of work on the status of the diplomatic courier and the diplomatic bag not accompanied by diplomatic courier. The Commission referred this draft to the General Assembly with the recommendation that the Assembly convoke a diplomatic conference for the purpose of concluding a convention on the basis of the articles. Also at the 41st session, the Commission adopted three articles of the Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind and discussed reports on state responsibility, international liability for injurious consequences arising out of acts not prohibited by international law, jurisdictional immunities of states and their property, and the law of the non-navigational uses of international watercourses. A report on relations between states and international organizations was presented to the Commission but was not discussed for lack of time. Finally, the Commission once again devoted a number of meetings to reviewing its procedures and methods of work.
16
Hall, Christopher Keith. "UN Convention on State Immunity: the Need for a Human Rights Protocol." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 55, no. 2 (April 2006): 411–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/iclq/lei089.
Full textAbstract:
The United Kingdom (UK) signed the UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and their property (Convention) less than a year after it was adopted by the UN General Assembly.1 The signature came only a few months after an open, but not well publicized, consultation with academics and society,2 and several months before a crucial appeal, in which the Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs is a party, is heard by the House of Lords of a decision permitting a civil suit to proceed against foreign government officials for torture committed abroad.3 Despite the signature, the UK has not yet announced whether it will ratify the Convention and, if so, whether it intends to do so with an understanding, declaration or reservation.4 As discussed below, it appears that the Convention might preclude victims of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, torture and other crimes under international law, as well as other human rights violations, committed abroad from recovering civil reparations in UK courts against states or their current of former officials or agents. In the light of the numerous ambiguities in the Convention and the risk that it will be interpreted by national courts as barring such reparations in those courts, the UK should not ratify it until a protocol is adopted expressly guaranteeing victims and their families the right to recover reparations in such cases.
17
Popa Tache, Cristina Elena. "State Immunity, Between Past and Future." Access to Justice in Eastern Europe 6, no. 1 (February 13, 2023): 97–110. http://dx.doi.org/10.33327/ajee-18-6.1-a000121.
Full textAbstract:
Background: State immunity, a subject rarely encountered in the East, is being brought to light more and more often lately. In the process of being detached from customary law, it has been subject to several attempts at codification. These attempts appear to have been overtaken by developments in doctrine, which demonstrates the existence of potentially delicate situations of public international law. In this context, we recall the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and their Property (New York, December 2004), which has not yet entered into force.1 In this context, we also note the initiatives for the establishment of the European Court of State Immunity contained in the European Convention on State Immunity of 1972 and its Additional Protocol, which has never been operational.2 Methods: This article aims to take stock of the status quo of the doctrine of state immunity in international law as a whole by highlighting the existing normative aspects in relation to the problems of implementation. Results and Conclusions: The arguments and conclusions are intended to underline the importance of understanding the reality, in particular, of how this doctrine works together with its exceptions. The method of scientific introspection based on primary and secondary data from scientific journals, books, documents, expert opinions, and other publications has been used to develop this article.
18
Protsenko, Iryna. "Contemporary problems of the application of international treaties and international customs in the domestic law of Ukraine." Yearly journal of scientific articles “Pravova derzhava”, no. 32 (2021): 456–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.33663/0869-2491-2021-32-456-465.
Full textAbstract:
Almost twenty-five years have passed since the adoption of the Constitution of Ukraine, but during this time the legislator has not made the necessary changes and additions to Article 9 of this regulatory legal act. This article of the Constitution regulates the issue of the place of an international treaty in the legal system of Ukraine, however, this regulation is imperfect and in practice gives rise to a number of conflicts. In particular, according to Article 9 of the Constitution of Ukraine, only those international treaties of Ukraine are recognized as part of the national legislation of Ukraine, the consent to the binding of which is provided by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. Thus, the place of intergovernmental and interdepartmental international treaties in the system of sources of law of Ukraine is uncertain, and therefore the rules for their application are not regulated. In addition, the question of the ratio of the norms of the aforementioned international treaties with the norms of the Law of Ukraine remains unanswered. The supreme body of the judiciary of Ukraine proposed ways to overcome these problems, but they are not sufficiently reasoned. Despite this, another long-standing problem of Ukrainian law is the problem of determining the rules for the operation of international customs in Ukraine. A number of modern examples of the application of international custom to the regulation of public relations in Ukraine demonstrate to us an urgent need to formulate a detailed legislative regulation of this issue. For example, we are talking about numerous cases of citizens of Ukraine appealing to domestic courts with claims against the Russian Federation, as a result of which, despite the principle of state jurisdictional immunity enshrined in Ukrainian legislation, not only civil proceedings begin, but even claims are satisfied. The basis for this is a number of decisions of the European Court of Human Rights (for example, the decision in the case "Oleinikov v. Russia"), which states that the provisions of the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property 2004 and the European (Basel) Convention on State Immunity 1972 can be applied as international custom. So, an interesting legal incident has developed in Ukraine: in the absence of legislative regulation of the issue of the place of international custom in the legal system of Ukraine, domestic courts turn to it on the basis of decisions of the ECHR, which, according to Ukrainian legislation, is the source of Ukrainian law. At the same time, individual rules for the operation of the customs of international humanitarian law in Ukraine were regulated at the level of a subordinate normative legal act - a special Instruction approved by the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine. By adopting it, the legislator implemented the basic norms, including the usual ones, of international humanitarian law, which should have greatly facilitated the procedure for their application by Ukrainian military personnel. However, the Instruction does not reflect certain customary norms of international humanitarian law quite correctly, which can cause serious problems in practice. In addition, the legally not precisely formulated Art. 483 of the 2001 Criminal Code of Ukraine, which provides for liability only for violation of the laws and customs of war stipulated by international treaties, the consent to be bound by which was provided by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, but not by international customs, of which there are quite a few in this area.
19
McCaffrey, Stephen C. "United Nations: International Law Commission Draft Articles on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and their Property." International Legal Materials 26, no. 3 (May 1987): 625–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020782900021343.
Full text
20
Morris, Virginia, and M. Christiane Bourloyannis-Vrailas. "The Work of the Sixth Committee at the Forty-eighth Session of the UN General Assembly." American Journal of International Law 88, no. 2 (April 1994): 343–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2204106.
Full textAbstract:
At the forty-eighth session of the General Assembly, the Sixth (Legal) Committee reviewed the annual reports of the International Law Commission (ILC), the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), the Special Committee on the Charter of the United Nations and on the Strengthening of the Role of the Organization (Special Committee), and the Committee on Relations with the Host Country (Host Country Committee). The Sixth Committee also considered proposals for two new legal instruments relating to (1) the jurisdictional immunities of states and their property, and (2) the safety and security of United Nations personnel. Other items covered by the committee included a proposal to request an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on questions regarding extraterritorial jurisdiction, as well as topics concerning international terrorism, economic relations, procedural aspects of the United Nations Administrative Tribunal and the United Nations Decade of International Law (Decade).
21
Masutti, Anna. "Legal Problems Arising from the Installation of the Galileo and EGNOS Ground Stations in NonEU Countries." Air and Space Law 37, Issue 1 (February 1, 2012): 65–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/aila2012005.
Full textAbstract:
For their full operational capability, the European Union (EU) Global Navigation Satellite Systems, Galileo and EGNOS, have to rely upon Ground Sensor Stations (GSS) for the monitoring of navigation signals received from satellites and for the transmission of data to Galileo Control Centres through public networks. Some of the GSS will be installed in non-EU countries. Naturally, for these stations, the EU would like to maintain, inter alia, the inviolability of the premises: facilities free from all types of radio interference, hacking and eavesdropping attempts; the right to use codes; the privileges accorded to diplomatic personnel, communications and documents. The legal analysis of this problem has been based on the applicability of the 1945 United Nations (UN) General Convention on the Privileges and Immunities, the 2004 UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, as well as on international customary law. Consideration has been given to the legal personality of the EU, to the nature of the activities performed by GSS in order to assess EU immunity from jurisdiction or immunity from execution.
22
Morris, Virginia, and M. Christiane Bourloyannis-Vrailas. "The Work of the Sixth Committee at the Fifty-Second Session of the UN General Assembly." American Journal of International Law 92, no. 3 (July 1998): 568–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2997932.
Full textAbstract:
At the fifty-second session of the General Assembly, the Sixth (Legal) Committee reviewed the annual reports of the International Law Commission (ILC), the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), the Special Committee on the Charter of the United Nations and on the Strengthening of the Role of the Organization (Special Committee) and the Committee on Relations with the Host Country (Host Country Committee). The Sixth Committee also considered proposals for three new legal instruments relating to (1) the establishment of a permanent international criminal court, (2) international terrorism and (3) jurisdictional immunities of states and their property, as well as other topics concerning the United Nations internal justice system, the United Nations Decade of International Law (Decade) and the United Nations Programme of Assistance in the Teaching, Study, Dissemination and Wider Appreciation of International Law. The topics are discussed in the order in which they were considered by the committee.
23
McCaffrey, Stephen C. "The Forty-Second Session of the International Law Commission." American Journal of International Law 84, no. 4 (October 1990): 930–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2202845.
Full textAbstract:
The International Law Commission of the United Nations held its forty-second session from May 1 to July 20, 1990, under the Chairmanship of Professor Shi Jiuyong. In the context of its work on the Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind, the Commission considered the establishment of an international criminal court and adopted three articles of the code. Also at the forty-second session, the Commission adopted six articles on the law of the non-navigational uses of international watercourses and discussed reports on state responsibility, relations between states and international organizations, international liability for injurious consequences arising out of acts not prohibited by international law and jurisdictional immunities of states and their property.
24
Kindred, Hugh M. "The Protection of Peacekeepers." Canadian Yearbook of international Law/Annuaire canadien de droit international 33 (1996): 257–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0069005800006093.
Full textAbstract:
SummaryIn light of the increased risks nowadays faced by much greater numbers of peacekeepers in hostile environments, the author surveys the legal sources for their safety and protection. The article first describes the kinds of personnel that may be engaged in peacekeeping operations before exploring the legal rights of protection that attach to each of them. It shows that many conventions, especially those relating to immunities of United Nations personnel as well as humanitarian and human rights treaties, contain general provisions that may be interpreted to include peacekeepers, but that none are aimed directly at thdr problems and protection. None, that is, until the United Nations adopted the Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel in the fall of 1994. When that Convention comes into force, it will impose affirmative duties on states to ensure the safety and security of peacekeepers and will apply criminal sanctions against individuals who attack them or their property. The article concludes that the new convention casts a wide net of protection over peacekeepers but suffers from two significant lacunae. It will not cover peacekeepers who are combatants (and the criteria for that characterization are unclear) or personnel engaged in non-United Nations peacekeeping operations.
25
Mccaffrey, Stephen C. "The Fortieth Session of the International Law Commission." American Journal of International Law 83, no. 1 (January 1989): 153–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2202801.
Full textAbstract:
The International Law Commission of the United Nations held its 40th session from May 9 to July 29, 1988, under the Chairmanship of Ambassador Leonardo Díaz-González. The Commission adopted 6 articles of the Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind and 14 articles on the law of non-navigational uses of international watercourses. Substantial time was devoted to both international liability for injurious consequences arising out of acts not prohibited by international law and the status of the diplomatic courier and the diplomatic bag not accompanied by diplomatic courier. Reports on jurisdictional immunities of states and their property and state responsibility were introduced by the special rapporteurs for those topics but were not discussed by the Commission owing to lack of time. The remaining substantive item on the Commission’s agenda, relations between states and international organizations (second part of the topic), was not considered at this session. Finally, the Commission once again devoted substantial time to reviewing its procedures and methods of work.
26
"United States Embassy Employee Case." International Law Reports 200 (2022): 334–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ilr.2022.30.
Full textAbstract:
334State immunity — Employment — Immunity in disputes arising out of an employment contract with an embassy — United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property, 2004 — Article 11(1) and (2)(a) of Jurisdictional Immunities Convention constituting customary international law — Whether employee was employed to perform sovereign activities — Whether determinative — Whether States enjoying immunity regarding disputes with employees performing activities closely functionally related to diplomatic and consular functions of the State — The law of Austria
27
"United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property." Uniform Law Review - Revue de droit uniforme 10, no. 3 (August 1, 2005): 554–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ulr/10.3.554.
Full text
28
"Kazakhstan Ministry of Finance and National Bank of Kazakhstan v. Ascom Group SA, Anatolie Stati, Gabriel Stati, Terra Raf Trans Traiding Ltd." International Law Reports 195 (2021): 387–413. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ilr.2021.43.
Full textAbstract:
387State immunity — Immunity from execution — Customary international law — United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property, 2004 — Articles 19 and 21 — Whether property of a State central bank immune from measures of constraintArbitration — Post-Award enforcement — Attachment — Whether property of a State central bank immune from attachment in satisfaction of an arbitral award rendered against the State — The law of Sweden
29
"Claims Relating to Premises of a Diplomatic Mission Case (Tyngene s.r.o. v. Municipal District Prague—Troja and the Republic of Korea—Embassy of the Republic of Korea)." International Law Reports 200 (2022): 346–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ilr.2022.31.
Full textAbstract:
346State immunity — Jurisdiction — Property — Functional nature of immunity — Acta jure imperii and acta jure gestionis — Immunity confined to acta jure imperii — Failure of lower courts to take this limitation into account — Premises of a diplomatic mission — Korean Embassy in Prague — Whether Republic of Korea immune from proceedings in Czech courtsDiplomatic relations — Immunity — Property — Korean Embassy in Prague — Whether Republic of Korea immune from proceedings in Czech courts — Whether Korean Embassy unjustly enriched — Whether immovable property used for purposes of State’s diplomatic mission — Inviolability of premises of diplomatic mission and performance of mission’s functions — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961, Article 22 — United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property, 2004, Article 13 — Whether first instance decision correct — The law of the Czech Republic
30
"State Immunity from Enforcement Case (MN v. Indian Republic—Embassy of the Indian Republic)." International Law Reports 200 (2022): 356–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ilr.2022.32.
Full textAbstract:
356State immunity — Enforcement — Property — Bank accounts of a diplomatic mission of a foreign State — Embassy of Indian Republic — Distinction between immunity of a foreign State from jurisdiction and immunity from enforcement — Whether bank accounts exempt from enforcement jurisdiction of Czech RepublicDiplomatic relations — Immunity — Property — Bank accounts of a diplomatic mission of a foreign State — Indian Republic Embassy in Prague — Whether bank accounts exempt from enforcement jurisdiction of Czech Republic — Czech Act on Private International Law — United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property, 2004, Articles 19(c) and 21(1)(a) — Whether bank accounts used exclusively in performance of function of diplomatic mission — Whether bank accounts could be attached in an execution — Whether decision of lower courts correct — The law of the Czech Republic
31
"Immunities and Criminal Proceedings; (Equatorial Guinea v. France)." International Law Reports 191 (2021): 219–373. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ilr.2020.5.
Full textAbstract:
International Court of Justice — Provisional measures — Diplomatic relations — Immunity of State officials and State property — Prima facie jurisdiction — United Nations Convention on Transnational Organized Crime, 2000 (“Palermo Convention”) — Optional Protocol to Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes, 1961 — Plausibility — Article 22 of Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Inviolability of diplomatic premises — Whether building located at 42 Avenue Foch could plausibly be regarded as housing diplomatic mission of Equatorial Guinea — Irreparable prejudice — Urgency — Link between provisional measures requested and rights sought to be protected International Court of Justice — Jurisdiction — Palermo Convention — Whether references to customary international law incorporate those rules of customary law into the Convention — Sovereign equality of States — Whether dispute regarding alleged breach of customary law principle within jurisdiction of the Court under the Palermo Convention — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, Optional Protocol — Dispute regarding status of buildings claimed as premises of diplomatic mission International Court of Justice — Admissibility — Abuse of process — Abuse of rights — Whether reasons not to exercise jurisdiction under Optional Protocol to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations — Matter for preliminary objections — Whether exceptional circumstances existing — Whether Application inadmissible on that basis — Abuse of rights — Whether ground of inadmissibility when establishment of rights claimed properly a matter for merits Treaties — Palermo Convention — Subject matter of dispute — Procedural preconditions to Court’s jurisdiction under Article 35(2) of Palermo Convention — Scope of jurisdiction ratione materiae under Palermo Convention — Article 4 of Palermo Convention — Incorporation of customary rules of international law on State immunity by reference to principles of sovereign equality, territorial integrity and non-intervention in internal affairs of other States — Alleged overextension of jurisdiction by France in implementing provisions of Palermo Convention 220Diplomatic relations — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Optional Protocol to Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes, 1961 — Subject matter of dispute — Procedural preconditions to Court’s jurisdiction under Articles II and III of Optional Protocol — Meaning of “premises of the mission” under Article 1(i) of Vienna Convention — Whether definition of “premises of the mission” falling within scope ratione materiae of Vienna Convention — Whether a dispute concerning inviolability of the building at 42 Avenue Foch State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Head of State immunity — Vice-President of State accused of misappropriation of funds and money laundering by authorities of another State — Whether entitled to immunity — Basis for any claim to immunity — Customary international law — Whether incorporated into Palermo Convention
32
"General Dynamics United Kingdom Ltd v. State of Libya." International Law Reports 201 (2023): 535–638. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ilr.2022.58.
Full textAbstract:
535Arbitration — Arbitral Tribunal of International Chamber of Commerce — Arbitral award — Damages — Failure to pay amount awarded — Enforcement proceedings — United Kingdom — Arbitration Act 1996 — Service of proceedings commenced in accordance with Arbitration Act 1996 — Whether service of proceedings must comply with State Immunity Act 1978 — Difficulty effecting service on defendant StateComity — Comity of nations as an interpretative principle — Subjecting State to jurisdiction of the courts of another State — Procedure for service — State Immunity Act 1978 — Obligations of States in the marketplace — Commercial legal obligations of StatesHuman rights — Treaties — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Article 6 — Access to jurisdiction of the courts — Relationship between Article 6 and State immunity — Whether requirement for service through diplomatic channels impeding Article 6 rightsRelationship of international law and municipal law — Customary international law — United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property, 2004 — State Immunity Act 1978 — Treaty provisions as an aid to interpretation of domestic law — Whether international custom existing at the time of passage of domestic lawState immunity — State Immunity Act 1978 — Service — Procedure for service — Whether Section 12(1) applicable — Whether arbitration claim form or enforcement order a document required to be served — Whether court having discretion to dispense with service on defendant State — Exceptional circumstances preventing service through diplomatic channels — The law of England
33
"Benkharbouche v. Embassy of the Republic of Sudan (Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Others intervening)." International Law Reports 180 (2019): 575–677. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/9781108562454.018.
Full textAbstract:
State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Embassy employment disputes — Domestic staff — Claims for infringement of employment rights — Whether claims barred by State immunity — State Immunity Act 1978 (“SIA”), Section 1 — Exceptions to immunity — Limitations to exceptions — Section 16(1)(a) of SIA — Section 4(2)(b) of SIA — Scope of immunity — Absolute immunity — Restrictive immunity — Whether starting point absolute or restrictive immunity — Distinction between jure gestionis and jure imperii — Customary international law — Whether rule of customary international law justifying Sections 4(2)(b) and 16(1)(a) of SIA — Whether United Kingdom having jurisdiction over respondent States — Whether Article 6 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 and Article 47 of Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union engagedDiplomatic relations — Immunity from jurisdiction — Embassy employment disputes — Domestic staff employed locally — Whether members of mission — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961, Article 1 — Whether Section 16(1)(a) of SIA applicable to claimants — Whether employment of domestic staff of diplomatic mission an act jure gestionis — Whether State entitled to State immunity in proceedings against employer embassiesRelationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950, Articles 6 and 14 — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 47 — Incorporation into English law — Sections 4(2)(b) and 16(1)(a) of SIA — Whether compatible — Whether Article 6 of European Convention engaged by claim to State immunity — Jurisprudence of European Court of Human Rights — Customary international law — Scope of State immunity — Whether starting point absolute or restrictive immunity — International Law Commission’s Draft Article 11 — United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and their Property, 2004, Article 11 — Relevance — Whether Sections 4(2)(b) and 16(1)(a) of SIA having any basis in customary international law — Whether employer States entitled to immunity as regards claimants’ claims — Whether Sections 4(2)(b) and 16(1)(a) of SIA compatible with Article 6 of European Convention and Article 47 of EU CharterHuman rights — Right of access to court — State immunity — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — State Immunity 576Act 1978 — Claimants bringing proceedings against foreign States in relation to employment at embassy — Whether defendant States immune — Whether provisions of SIA barring claimants’ access to court — Whether recognition of immunity involving violation of right of access to courts — Whether infringement of Article 6 of European Convention and Article 47 of EU CharterHuman rights — Prohibition of discrimination — State immunity — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Whether Section 4(2)(b) of State Immunity Act 1978 discriminating on grounds of nationality — Whether infringing Article 14 taken together with Article 6 of European Convention — The law of England
34
"Roger O’Keefe & Christian J. Tams, The United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property: A Commentary, Oxford, Oxford University Press 2013, pp. 465, £ 95." European Journal of Law Reform 16, no. 3 (September 2014): 669–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.5553/ejlr/138723702014016003009.
Full text