Suchergebnisse

This study examines the reservations to the acceptance of compulsory jurisdiction included in declarations made by States under Article 36(2) of the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice and of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and discusses the practical application by the Court of the principle of reciprocity to such reservations in contentious cases submitted to it under Article 36(2). It has been considered that, due to acceptance conditioned by so many diverse, and complicated reservations, the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court has been declining in significance. The recent trend of acceptance of the compulsory jurisdiction does not support such a conclusion. Since the practice of making declarations with reservations has continued, further study of the Court's jurisprudence in dealing with such reservations seems necessary. This analysis attempts to show that reservations in unilateral declarations do not contribute to the decline of the Optional Clause. In fact, reservations provide for the flexibility which many States consider essential in accepting the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice. Thus, the right to include a variety of reservations in unilateral declarations may in fact contribute to the wider acceptance of compulsory jurisdiction

During the Cold War, international relations and international law were deeply shaped by the struggle for global dominance between the United States and the Soviet Union. The clashes between the superpowers reverberated in legal issues relating to the functioning of the United Nations, the use of force, nuclear nonproliferation, human rights, etc. The many newly independent states, caught in the middle, repeatedly made claims for reform and initiated rule-making initiatives, but with limited results. After the end of the Cold War, the United States, its Western allies, and their shared economic and geopolitical interests remained largely unchallenged in the international arena.

This unique compendium offers an article-by-article commentary on the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States. Providing a comprehensive explanation of the functioning of this important mechanism for the settlement of investor-State disputes, it incorporates the preparatory work, the Convention's text, various rules and regulations adopted under the Convention, the practice of arbitral tribunals under the Convention, and academic writings on the subject. The first and second editions of this Commentary have been relied upon by numerous arbitral tribunals. This third edition follows the same system and approach, but extensive updates and revisions reflect the vast increase in arbitral practice since the publication of the second edition. A number of novel issues that have emerged through this practice are now addressed, making this practice-oriented guide an indispensable tool for anyone dealing with the ICSID Convention. Likewise, the number of contributors to and editors of the third edition has increased.