David D. Caron

The International Law Commission's Articles on State Responsibility: Introduction, Text and Commentaries (Book)

Preface Note on sources and style List of abbreviations Table of cases Introduction Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts: Part I. The Internationally Wrongful Act of a State: 1. General principles 2. Attribution of conduct to a state 3. Breach of an international obligation 4. Responsibility of a state in connection with the act of another state 5. Circumstances precluding wrongfulness Part II. Content of the International Responsibility of a State: 6. General principles 7. Reparation for injury 8. Serious breaches of obligations under peremptory norms of general international law Part III. The Implementation of the International Responsibility of a State: 9. Invocation of the responsibility of a state 10. Countermeasures Part IV. General Provisions Appendix 1: drafting history Appendix 2: Draft articles on state responsibility provisionally adopted by the International Law Commission on first reading (1996) Appendix 3: table of equivalent articles Select bibliography Index.

The Legitimacy of the Collective Authority of the Security Council

This article discusses the exercises of collective authority by the Security Council. More specifically, it considers what it means to speak of an institution’s use of authority as illegitimate. It addresses particular circumstances that lead broad perceptions of illegitimacy regarding the collective authority of the Security Council, and discusses proposals for reform.

The International Whaling Commission and the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission: The Institutional Risks of Coercion for Consensual Structures

This note focuses on the questioning by pro-whaling nations of the institutional integrity of the International Whaling Commission in its pursuit of the cessation of all whaling. This challenge to the Commission is particularly manifest in the resumption of commercial whaling by Norway and the establishment by several states of the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission.

When Law Makes Climate Change Worse: Rethinking the Law of Baselines in Light of a Rising Sea Level

This article discusses the revolution of the law of baselines, notes that how this aspect of the law of the sea rests upon assumptions that there will not be a significant rise in sea level, and argues that the current law of baselines will not only hamper adaptation to a rising sea level, but indeed may aggravate the consequences of climate change. The article then offers alternatives to the present law of baselines.

War and International Adjudication: Reflections on the 1899 Peace Conference

In fact, the first organized communities of international law . . . are organizations the function of which is to settle conflicts. Hans Kelsen But here we shall note the recurrence of a paradox . . . . Where practice is least ethical, theory becomes most Utopian. Edward Hallett Carr The belief that a world free of war might be possible, be more than simply a dream, is a relatively recent phenomenon. In earlier times, war—like disease—was a part of life. There existed then a fatalism about war that no doubt persists in many parts of the world today. During the nineteenth century, however, parts of the world developed a confidence in progress and a hope that progress might extend to the abolition of war. Most importantly for this essay, a popular belief circulated at the e nd of the century that the establishment of a permanent international court would be an important step toward a world free of war. Ad hoc arbitration, as distinct from adjudication by such a permanent court, was not the same and, by itself, not enough. The 1899 Peace Conference was a point of inflection, a turn in the river, in the effort to move beyond ad hoc international arbitration to adjudication by a permanent international court as a means to avoid war a nd preserve international peace and security.

The UNCITRAL arbitration rules : a commentary

Reaching past the secrecy so often met in arbitration, this study explains clearly and fully the workings of the UNCITRAL Rules of Arbitral Procedure recommended for use in 1976 by the United Nations. Pulling together difficult to obtain sources from the Iran -United States Claims Tribunal, arbitrations under Chapter 11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement, and ad hoc arbitrations the Authors illuminate the shape the bare bones UNCITRAL Rules take in practice. The authors cogently critique that practice in the light of the negotiating history of the rules and solutions adopted by the other major private rules of arbitral procedure. To aid the specialist in the field, the practice of these various tribunals is also faithfully extracted and reproduced so that it may be argued in yet unforeseen procedural contexts. Rich both in its analysis and sources, this text is indispensable for the international arbitration field. The Authors have all served with the staff of the Iran -United States Claims Tribunal and served as arbitrators, counsel and judges with institutions ranging from the World Banks International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, to the European Court of Human Rights, and the United Nations.

The Nature of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal and the Evolving Structure of International Dispute Resolution

The Iran-United States Claims Tribunal has been called “the most significant arbitral body in history”; its awards, “a gold mine of information for perceptive lawyers.” In a recent international commercial arbitration, however, an arbitrator reportedly stated that decisions of the Tribunal, although on point, were not persuasive because the Tribunal, after all, involves a special type of arbitration. This arbitrator is not alone. A lecturer at the Hague Academy of International Law, speaking on international commercial arbitration, reportedly did not refer to the Tribunal’s jurisprudence because he did not find it relevant to his work for the same reason. Viewed as a gigantic experiment in international dispute resolution rather than merely a claims settlement device for this particular group of disputes, the Tribunal thus appears (at least to some) to yield decisions of unclear precedential value. Millions of dollars have been spent on its operation and hundreds of awards rendered, yet an apparently not uncommon perception is that the work of this, in some respects unique, institution is not applicable elsewhere.

Towards a Political Theory of International Courts and Tribunals

This essay offers a sketch of the authors political theory of international courts and tribunals. First, it suggests two basic distinctions between types of international tribunals. Second, an overview of selected political science literature is provided to introduce a more expanded view of the function of international courts. Third, the essay provides a sketch of the bounded strategic space theory as a means for understanding and explaining international courts and tribunals.

The Place of the Environment in International Tribunals

This essay considers the place of the environment in international institutions created to address the consequences of war. In considering this topic, I address two fundamental questions that have substantial implications for how an international mechanism should be structured so as to address an environmental claim. First, precisely what is an environmental claim? What is the relationship between the claimant and the environment it claims to represent? Second, from where are the monies for mitigation and restoration to come? These two questions pro- vide a basis for assessing international mechanisms, and, in that light, the present design of mechanisms appears inadequate. Simultaneously, I emphasize my doubt that the issue is with the tribunals per se - institu- tions usually find ways to perform the tasks entrusted to them. Rather, the issue generally is antecedent to the institution and embedded in the polit- ical decisions to entrust or not to entrust certain matters to it.

The Iran-United States Claims Tribunal and the Process of International Claims Resolution

It is the contention of this important book that the Iran-United States Tribunal, and other more recent institutions such as the UNCC and the Zurich Dormant Accounts Commission, reflecting a growing determination by the international community to recognise the rights of individuals. Adjudicating their claims for economic injury even if the redress provided is only approximate or incomplete. Examining the Tribunals structure, operations and evolution in search of the underlying patterns that characterise such international institutions, this valuable book records the diverse experiences and judgements of a group of outstanding lawyers from many countries, each of whom has played a significant role at some stage of the Tribunals proceedings.