This book explores the effects of institutional fragmentation in international human rights law, by comparing the rights jurisprudence of three human rights courts and bodies, namely the European Court for Human Rights, the Inter-American Court for Human Rights and the Human Rights Committee. Contributions cover the areas of freedom of expression (journalism and the media), right to privacy, freedom of assembly and freedom of association (political parties), and measure the extent of fragmentation of human rights protection. Moreover, the volume argues that, while the conflict of laws approach, favoured by the International Law Commission, might work in avoiding outright conflict in obligation, in practice it is not an approach that presents a viable research agenda when it comes to understanding the causes and consequences of institutional fragmentation. This is especially evident in areas like international human rights, where the possibility of a silent drift between the jurisprudence of the three courts is a real possibility. This book was originally published as a special issue of the Nordic Journal of Human Rights.
Most bilateral investment treaties deal with the risks created by such investment by ... from the other “[s]ubject to its right to exercise 73 Vandevelde, ...
6.96 Plummer v IRC (1988)... 6.39, 6.58 Po, The (1991)... 2.34 Pocket Kings Ltd v Safenames Ltd (2010). . . 3.42 Polly Peck International plc (in administration) (No4), Re (1998)... 2.260 Polly Peck International plc v Nadir (1992).
Investment Treaty Arbitration and International Law
9 IPRax 2004 , 339. Vgl . hierzu Juliana Mörsdorf - Schulte , Europäische Impulse für Namen und Status des Mehrstaaters , IPRax 2004 , 315 ff . zen , behandelt zu werden “ 10 . Dieses Ergebnis 159.
(Czech Republic), Mr. David Goldberg, Partner at White & Case LLP (United Kingdom), Dr. Beata Gessel-Kalinowska vel Kalisz, President of Lewiatan Court of Arbitration and Managing Partner at GESSEL Law Firm (Poland), Dr. Crenguta Leaua ...
... to the cause of action may bring the action within such times as are before limited after the return of the absent person to the province.106 It would seem that the statute is not 101 Huber v . Steiner , supra , note 99 ; Harris v .
This research review discusses an important selection of research articles and papers on the cross-border enforcement of intellectual property rights.
To help readers come to grips with the necessity of approaching the subject from a transnational perspective, this book surveys the best available U.S. and foreign cases, statutes, and commentaries covering global Internet Law developments.
John E. Montgomery , Professor of Law , University of South Carolina . PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY , Third Edition ( 1984 ) , with 1984 Selected National Standards Supplement Thomas D. Morgan , Dean of the Law School , Emory University ...
The Conflict of Laws