Anthony Cullen

The Threshold of Non-International Armed Conflict

This chapter examines the threshold distinguishing situations of non-international armed conflict from situations of internal disturbances in light of recent developments. An argument is advanced in support of a particular approach to the application of this threshold in the characterisation of non-international armed conflict. The definition of non-international armed conflict provided in the case law of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) forms a central tenet of this argument.

The characterization of remote warfare under international humanitarian law

This chapter examines the qualification of remote warfare as a form of armed conflict under international humanitarian law. It does so first by considering how armed conflict is defined and how the concept has evolved since the drafting of the Geneva Conventions of 1949. It then focuses on three modes of attack that are commonly associated with remote warfare: the use of remotely piloted vehicles, cyber operations, and autonomous weapon systems. Bearing in mind the challenges that each of these present to the applicability of the law, it will be argued that the concept of armed conflict needs to be interpreted in terms consistent with the object and purpose of international humanitarian law, in accordance with Article 31 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Enforcement of foreign arbitral awards: a London perspective

The virtues of international arbitration are well-known. However, without the ability to enforce foreign arbitral awards, in the event of a party to arbitration failing, refusing or otherwise not honouring the award, international arbitration becomes a paper tiger. This is why the possibility of enforcement pursuant to the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards is of cardinal importance. Mindful of the UKs treaty obligations under the New York Convention, this paper focuses on the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards from a London perspective. It will do so for two reasons: London has long standing and hard won reputation as one of the truly global centres of international arbitration. It is also recognised as a bellwether for international finance. In light of such recognition, this paper will examine the approach adopted by the English judiciary to international arbitration awards and ultimately their enforcement or otherwise in the courts of England and Wales.