25,920 research outputs found

    ICJ, Case Concerning East Timor, 1995

    Get PDF

    Heterogeneity gap in stable juridiction structures

    Get PDF
    Stability, Jurisdictions, Public Projects, Heterogeneity Gap

    The Function of State and Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities in International Cooperation in Criminal Matters: The Position in Switzerland

    Get PDF
    In so far as diplomats are concerned, their immunity from legal process arises under customary international law and treaty law (i.e., the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations,\u27 the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations,2 and the New York Convention on Special Missions\u27 (or New York Convention )). All three conventions state in their preliminaries that diplomatic immunity and privilege arise from international custom and that their function is not to benefit individuals, but to ensure the smooth and efficient performance of their duties in the interest of comity and of friendly relations between sovereign nations

    Family Court Juridiction

    Get PDF

    A Comparison of the American Model and French (-Inspired) Appellate Model

    Get PDF
    Both the American and the French legal system have a three-tiered structure. However, the respective roles and functions of the courts on each step of the ladder is vastly different in both. Whereas the general system in the U.S. is to have one trial court and two ‘higher’ courts (a court of appeals and a supreme court), the French / European continental system consists of two ‘factual’ courts (the basic level and the court of appeals), and one ‘legal’ (the supreme court) with limited or even inexistent possibilities to look at the facts. The purpose of this thesis is to look at these two models of division of labor between the three tiers through the lens of (i) the procedural leeway each of the courts has and (ii) their focus on fact or law, in function of what questions can be raised in appeal and have to be answered by the courts. We will add Germany to the comparison, as (i) the structure of its court system was inspired by the French, but (ii) has evolved over the years and has been recently (2002) overhauled specifically as to appeals, both to the second level of courts and to the supreme court. We will do so by examining the avenues open for the parties in filing an appeal as well as for the courts in adjudicating those. It will be clear that the distinct philosophies regarding the appellate systems have influence on the entire organization of the different court systems. We conclude that the present-day German system offers the best differentiation of roles between the three tiers while balancing access to the appellate and supreme court level

    De la notion de juridiction en droit administratif canadien

    Get PDF
    The object of this article considers the ever-evolving concept of jurisdiction in the context of judicial review of administrative action. The author examines recent jurisprudential developments from an historical perspective in an attempt to reveal those factors triggering intervention. The Supreme Court of Canada has often fashioned its tests of jurisdiction to fit the intended results. Hence, over the last decades, jurisdictional terminology has become ripe with deceptive distinctions and attempts to rationalize the various tests have in fact raised most perplexing problems

    Les bases constitutionelles de l'organisation judiciaire aux Pays-Bas

    Get PDF
    Item does not contain fulltextRapports néerlandais pour le Xe Congrès International de Droit Compar

    Nouvelles récentes de l'article 96

    Get PDF
    When called upon, to ascertain the ambit of the application of section 96 of the B.N.A. Act (1867), our courts have devised a method of reasoning by historical analogy between different types of jurisdictions. In Tomko v. Labour Relations Board (N.S.) and al., the Supreme Court was given the opportunity to make a clear synthesis of the principles underlying such an approach. Although the Court's decision makes no innovations in this respect, it establishes clear guidelines to be followed by the judiciary when it shall next be called upon to pronounce itself on the constitutionnality of the conferral of jurisdiction upon inferior tribunals or provincial administrative organisms in the light of section 96. The Supreme Court is now hearing the appeal in P.g. du Québec et Tribunal des Transports v. Farrah. In that case, the Court of Appeal held that when the Transport Tribunal hears an appeal from the Transport Commission on questions of law only, it exercises a jurisdiction which is analogous to the superintending power of the Superior Court. The Court of appeal therefore considered that the judges of the Transport Tribunal fall under the application of section 96. If the Supreme Court were to confirm the appeal tribunal's decisions it most probably would also have to examin the constitutionnality of certain "privative" clauses; if it were to refuse to adopt the Court of appeal's view, it would render possible the establishment of an administrative appeal court whose judges would be nominated by the Province

    Le statut des déclarations d'acceptation de la juridiction obligatoire de la Cour internationale de justice

    Get PDF
    « En l'état actuel de la société internationale, une véritable juridiction obligatoire n'est pas encore possible, au moins au plan international. » Par ces termes, les professeurs N. Quoc Dinh, P. Dailler et A. Pellet ont jugé la juridiction internationale. Dans le présent article, l'auteur essaie de vérifier l'étendue de ce jugement à travers l'étude du statut des déclarations d'acceptation de la juridiction obligatoire de la Cour internationale de justice (CIJ). Théoriquement, ces déclarations, selon les termes de l'article 36, alinéa 2 du Statut de cette cour, sont d'une importance majeure et facile à remarquer. Cela provient en fait de l'esprit même de l'article 36 qui a pour objet d'encourager les États à adhérer au système de la clause facultative, dont la majorité ont manifesté une répugnance ou une réticence à l'égard de la juridiction obligatoire, en leur donnant des avantages précieux afin qu'ils puissent mieux adapter les déclarations à leurs positions particulières. Dans le texte qui suit, l'auteur met d'abord en évidence le fondement juridique des déclarations d'acceptation de la juridiction obligatoire de la CIJ selon un développement historique et une numérotation de leurs conditions de validité. Ensuite, dans une analyse du régime juridique des déclarations d'acceptation, l'auteur met l'accent successivement sur les formes, la procédure et le champ d'application dans le temps de ces déclarations. Enfin, il se livre à une discussion portant sur un point vulnérable du statut des déclarations, à savoir leur nature juridique. Une partie de la doctrine souligne le caractère unilatéral des déclarations d'acceptation de la juridiction obligatoire de la CIJ, tandis que l'autre soutient la nature conventionnelle des déclarations d'acceptation. En ce qui concerne la jurisprudence, ni les arrêts de la Cour permanente de justice internationale (CPJI) ni ceux de la CIJ ne sont prononcés d'une manière claire, nette et catégorique sur la nature juridique des déclarations d'acceptation. En adoptant une conception large des actes unilatéraux étatiques, l'auteur considère ainsi que chaque déclaration joue un rôle décisif dans l'élaboration et l'application du droit conventionnel : une déclaration d'acceptation est de nature unilatérale, alors que les déclarations d'acceptation sont de nature conventionnelle.« Considering current conditions in international society, a truly compulsory jurisdiction is not yet possible, at least internationally. » It is in these terms that Professors N. Quoc Dinh, P. Dailler and A. Pellet have expressed their judgment on an international jurisdiction. In this paper, the author attempts to assess the scope of this judgment by analyzing the acceptance declarations on compulsory jurisdiction in the Statute of the International Court of Justice (CIJ). In theory, these declarations, under the terms of section 36, paragraph 2 of the Court's Statute, are of major importance and are easily recognizable. This indeed comes from the spirit of section 36 whose purpose is to incite States to adhere to the optional clause system, the majority of whom have expressed aversion or hesitation with regard to compulsory jurisdiction, by providing them with valuable advantages so that they may better adapt the declarations to their individual positions. In the ensuing text, the author first emphasizes the legal basis of the acceptance declarations of the ICJ's compulsory jurisdiction based on an historic development and the numbering of their conditions of validity. Then, in an analysis of the legal regime of the acceptance declarations, the author successively emphasizes the forms, procedure and temporal scope of application of these declarations. Finally, he focuses on a weak point in the statute of declarations, namely their basis in law. One part of the doctrine underscores the unilateral character of the acceptance declarations of the ICJ's compulsory Jurisdiction, while the other supports the conventional nature of the acceptance declarations. From the standpoint of case-law, neither the rulings of the Permanent International Court of Justice nor those of the ICJ have taken a clear, net and categorical stance on the legal nature of the acceptance declarations. By adopting a broad view of unilateral state acts, the author then considers that every declaration plays a decisive role in the development and application of conventional law : an acceptance declaration is unilateral by nature while acceptance declarations are conventional by nature
    • …
    corecore