The Third-Party Liability of International Organisations: Towards a ‘Complete Remedy System’ Counterbalancing Jurisdictional Immunity: Legal Aspects of International Organizations, cartea 63
Autor Thomas S.M. Henqueten Limba Engleză Hardback – 12 iul 2023
Din seria Legal Aspects of International Organizations
- 18%
Preț: 1268.18 lei - 18%
Preț: 1269.66 lei - 18%
Preț: 1267.49 lei - 18%
Preț: 1274.08 lei - 18%
Preț: 1573.32 lei - 18%
Preț: 897.76 lei - 18%
Preț: 1050.43 lei - 18%
Preț: 1411.89 lei - 18%
Preț: 1050.35 lei - 18%
Preț: 703.12 lei - 18%
Preț: 1092.01 lei - 18%
Preț: 704.22 lei - 18%
Preț: 883.67 lei - 18%
Preț: 1120.27 lei - 18%
Preț: 1416.40 lei - 18%
Preț: 798.22 lei - 18%
Preț: 837.77 lei - 18%
Preț: 650.98 lei - 18%
Preț: 891.77 lei - 18%
Preț: 894.50 lei - 18%
Preț: 1120.06 lei - 18%
Preț: 846.77 lei - 18%
Preț: 878.00 lei - 18%
Preț: 907.01 lei - 18%
Preț: 684.54 lei - 18%
Preț: 859.24 lei
Preț: 832.85 lei
Preț vechi: 1015.68 lei
-18% Nou
Puncte Express: 1249
Preț estimativ în valută:
159.39€ • 165.57$ • 132.40£
159.39€ • 165.57$ • 132.40£
Carte indisponibilă temporar
Doresc să fiu notificat când acest titlu va fi disponibil:
Se trimite...
Preluare comenzi: 021 569.72.76
Specificații
ISBN-13: 9789004532076
ISBN-10: 9004532072
Dimensiuni: 155 x 235 mm
Greutate: 0 kg
Editura: Brill
Colecția Brill | Nijhoff
Seria Legal Aspects of International Organizations
ISBN-10: 9004532072
Dimensiuni: 155 x 235 mm
Greutate: 0 kg
Editura: Brill
Colecția Brill | Nijhoff
Seria Legal Aspects of International Organizations
Notă biografică
Thomas S.M. Henquet, Ph.D. (Leiden University), LL.M. (Yale University), LL.M. (University of Amsterdam), specialises in international law and dispute resolution. He has acquired broad experience in these areas, working in international organisations, government and private practice. He has also lectured and published on a number of related topics.
Cuprins
Preface
Acknowledgments
Abbreviations
1Introduction
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Research Objective and Research Questions
1.2.1Case Studies: Introduction
1.2.2The Rule of Law
1.3 Structure and Outline of the Study
2The International Organisations Law Framework Governing Third-Party Remedies
2.1 Introduction
2.2 The Legal Status of International Organizations in Domestic Legal Orders and the International Legal Order
2.2.1Domestic Legal Personality, and Privileges and Immunities
2.2.2International Legal Personality
2.2.2.1 Legal Consequences of International Legal Personality: The ario
2.2.3Interim Conclusions
2.3 How Are International Organisations, and the UN in Particular, Bound by International Law?
2.3.1Treaty Law, General International Law and jus cogens
2.3.1.1 Treaty Law
2.3.1.2 General International Law
2.3.1.3Jus cogens
2.3.2Sources of Obligations Specific to the UN
2.3.2.1 ‘Constitutional’ Obligations
2.3.2.2 Kosovo under unmik Administration
2.3.3Interim Conclusions
2.4 International Human Rights Law
2.4.1Primary Rules
2.4.2Secondary Rules: the ‘Right to a Remedy’
2.4.2.1 Procedural Obligations
2.4.2.2 Substantive obligations
2.4.3Interim Conclusions
2.5 Conclusions
3Section 29(A) of the General Convention
3.1 Introduction
3.2 The UN Is Bound by the Obligation under Section 29 of the General Convention
3.2.1The General Convention Is Binding on the UN
3.2.2Failure to Implement Section 29 of the General Convention and Jurisdictional Immunity
3.2.2.1 Whether the UN’s Entitlement to Immunity Is Conditional on Its Compliance with Section 29 of the General Convention
3.2.2.2 Denying the UN’s Immunity in Response to ‘Material Breach’ or as a ‘Countermeasure’
3.3 Overview of Practice of the UN under Section 29(a) of the General Convention
3.3.1Key Documents Setting Out the Practice and Regulations of the UN
3.3.2The UN’s Practice Per Category of Dispute
3.3.2.1 Disputes ‘Arising Out of Commercial Agreements (Contracts and Lease Agreements)’
3.3.2.2 Other Disputes of a Private Law Character
3.3.2.3 ‘Other Claims’
3.3.3From Srebrenica to Haiti: Introduction to Case Studies
3.3.3.1 The Srebrenica Genocide
3.3.3.2 The Kosovo Lead Poisoning
3.3.3.3 The Haiti Cholera Epidemic
3.4 Discussion: ‘A Complete Remedy System to Private Parties’?
3.4.1General Observations Regarding Section 29 of the General Convention
3.4.1.1 ‘Disputes … to Which the UN Is a Party’
3.4.1.2 Liability and Responsibility
3.4.1.3 Who Decides?
3.4.1.4 Interim Conclusions
3.4.2‘Private Law Character’
3.4.2.1 ‘Private Law Character’: Interpretation
3.4.2.2 UN Practice Regarding ‘Private Law Character’
3.4.2.3 Interim Conclusions
3.4.3‘Provisions for Appropriate Modes of Settlement’
3.4.3.1 ‘Appropriate Modes of Settlement’
3.4.3.2 Applicable Law: The UN Liability Rules
3.4.3.3 Interim Conclusions
3.5 Conclusions
4The Jurisdictional Immunity of International Organisations in the Netherlands and the View from Strasbourg
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Immunity from Jurisdiction
4.2.1Rationale
4.2.2Sources
4.2.3Procedural Aspects
4.2.4‘Functional Immunity’
4.3 Immunity from Jurisdiction and ‘Access to Court’
4.3.1Waite and Kennedy
4.3.2‘Reasonable Alternative Means’: Beyond Waite and Kennedy
4.3.2.1 Interim Conclusions
4.3.3Absence of Reasonable Alternative Means: Mothers of Srebrenica
4.3.3.1 Immunity from Jurisdiction, Access to Court and Reasonable Alternative Means
4.3.3.2 ‘Civil Right’ under Article 6(1) of the echr in Light of Section 29 of the General Convention
4.3.3.3 Resolving the Conflict between Jurisdictional Immunity and Access to Court Absent Reasonable Alternative Means
4.4 Reducing ‘Accountability Gaps’: A Role for National Courts?
4.5 Conclusions
5Towards a ‘Complete Remedy System’ for Third-Parties under Section 29 of the General Convention
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Proposed Solutions
5.2.1The Legal Character of Third-Party Disputes
5.2.2(Standing) Claims Commissions
5.2.2.1 A Revised Legal Framework for Standing Claims Commissions
5.2.2.2 The Consistent Interpretation and Application of the UN Liability Rules
5.2.3Arbitration
5.2.3.1 Appropriate Arbitration Rules for Third-Party Disputes
5.2.3.2 Neutral Arbitration of Third-Party Disputes: Denationalised and Self-Contained Arbitration
5.3 The Mechanism for the Settlement of Disputes of a Private Law Character
5.3.1Amicable and Contentious Dispute Resolution under the Auspices of the pca
5.3.1.1 Amicable Dispute Resolution
5.3.1.2 Contentious Proceedings: First Instance Tribunals and the Standing Appellate Tribunal
5.3.1.3 The Permanent Court of Arbitration
5.3.2Establishment and Legal Framework of the Mechanism
5.3.2.1 The unga Resolution
5.3.2.2 The Convention
5.3.2.3 Financial Implications
5.3.3Other International Organisations
5.4 Conclusions
6Findings and Conclusions
6.1 Findings
6.2 Concluding Observations
Bibliography
Table of Cases
Index
Acknowledgments
Abbreviations
1Introduction
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Research Objective and Research Questions
1.2.1Case Studies: Introduction
1.2.2The Rule of Law
1.3 Structure and Outline of the Study
2The International Organisations Law Framework Governing Third-Party Remedies
2.1 Introduction
2.2 The Legal Status of International Organizations in Domestic Legal Orders and the International Legal Order
2.2.1Domestic Legal Personality, and Privileges and Immunities
2.2.2International Legal Personality
2.2.2.1 Legal Consequences of International Legal Personality: The ario
2.2.3Interim Conclusions
2.3 How Are International Organisations, and the UN in Particular, Bound by International Law?
2.3.1Treaty Law, General International Law and jus cogens
2.3.1.1 Treaty Law
2.3.1.2 General International Law
2.3.1.3Jus cogens
2.3.2Sources of Obligations Specific to the UN
2.3.2.1 ‘Constitutional’ Obligations
2.3.2.2 Kosovo under unmik Administration
2.3.3Interim Conclusions
2.4 International Human Rights Law
2.4.1Primary Rules
2.4.2Secondary Rules: the ‘Right to a Remedy’
2.4.2.1 Procedural Obligations
2.4.2.2 Substantive obligations
2.4.3Interim Conclusions
2.5 Conclusions
3Section 29(A) of the General Convention
3.1 Introduction
3.2 The UN Is Bound by the Obligation under Section 29 of the General Convention
3.2.1The General Convention Is Binding on the UN
3.2.2Failure to Implement Section 29 of the General Convention and Jurisdictional Immunity
3.2.2.1 Whether the UN’s Entitlement to Immunity Is Conditional on Its Compliance with Section 29 of the General Convention
3.2.2.2 Denying the UN’s Immunity in Response to ‘Material Breach’ or as a ‘Countermeasure’
3.3 Overview of Practice of the UN under Section 29(a) of the General Convention
3.3.1Key Documents Setting Out the Practice and Regulations of the UN
3.3.2The UN’s Practice Per Category of Dispute
3.3.2.1 Disputes ‘Arising Out of Commercial Agreements (Contracts and Lease Agreements)’
3.3.2.2 Other Disputes of a Private Law Character
3.3.2.3 ‘Other Claims’
3.3.3From Srebrenica to Haiti: Introduction to Case Studies
3.3.3.1 The Srebrenica Genocide
3.3.3.2 The Kosovo Lead Poisoning
3.3.3.3 The Haiti Cholera Epidemic
3.4 Discussion: ‘A Complete Remedy System to Private Parties’?
3.4.1General Observations Regarding Section 29 of the General Convention
3.4.1.1 ‘Disputes … to Which the UN Is a Party’
3.4.1.2 Liability and Responsibility
3.4.1.3 Who Decides?
3.4.1.4 Interim Conclusions
3.4.2‘Private Law Character’
3.4.2.1 ‘Private Law Character’: Interpretation
3.4.2.2 UN Practice Regarding ‘Private Law Character’
3.4.2.3 Interim Conclusions
3.4.3‘Provisions for Appropriate Modes of Settlement’
3.4.3.1 ‘Appropriate Modes of Settlement’
3.4.3.2 Applicable Law: The UN Liability Rules
3.4.3.3 Interim Conclusions
3.5 Conclusions
4The Jurisdictional Immunity of International Organisations in the Netherlands and the View from Strasbourg
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Immunity from Jurisdiction
4.2.1Rationale
4.2.2Sources
4.2.3Procedural Aspects
4.2.4‘Functional Immunity’
4.3 Immunity from Jurisdiction and ‘Access to Court’
4.3.1Waite and Kennedy
4.3.2‘Reasonable Alternative Means’: Beyond Waite and Kennedy
4.3.2.1 Interim Conclusions
4.3.3Absence of Reasonable Alternative Means: Mothers of Srebrenica
4.3.3.1 Immunity from Jurisdiction, Access to Court and Reasonable Alternative Means
4.3.3.2 ‘Civil Right’ under Article 6(1) of the echr in Light of Section 29 of the General Convention
4.3.3.3 Resolving the Conflict between Jurisdictional Immunity and Access to Court Absent Reasonable Alternative Means
4.4 Reducing ‘Accountability Gaps’: A Role for National Courts?
4.5 Conclusions
5Towards a ‘Complete Remedy System’ for Third-Parties under Section 29 of the General Convention
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Proposed Solutions
5.2.1The Legal Character of Third-Party Disputes
5.2.2(Standing) Claims Commissions
5.2.2.1 A Revised Legal Framework for Standing Claims Commissions
5.2.2.2 The Consistent Interpretation and Application of the UN Liability Rules
5.2.3Arbitration
5.2.3.1 Appropriate Arbitration Rules for Third-Party Disputes
5.2.3.2 Neutral Arbitration of Third-Party Disputes: Denationalised and Self-Contained Arbitration
5.3 The Mechanism for the Settlement of Disputes of a Private Law Character
5.3.1Amicable and Contentious Dispute Resolution under the Auspices of the pca
5.3.1.1 Amicable Dispute Resolution
5.3.1.2 Contentious Proceedings: First Instance Tribunals and the Standing Appellate Tribunal
5.3.1.3 The Permanent Court of Arbitration
5.3.2Establishment and Legal Framework of the Mechanism
5.3.2.1 The unga Resolution
5.3.2.2 The Convention
5.3.2.3 Financial Implications
5.3.3Other International Organisations
5.4 Conclusions
6Findings and Conclusions
6.1 Findings
6.2 Concluding Observations
Bibliography
Table of Cases
Index