Jurisprudence Of The Pcij And Of The Icj On Interim Measures Of Protection

This book deals with all the cases that came before the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ) from 1922 to 1946, as well as those that were heard by its successor, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) from 1946 to 2020 in which interim measures of protection were either indicated or refused. The monograph shows how cases in which injunctive relief was sought were handled and how the PCIJ and the ICJ have undergone certain reforms over the years. The new approach taken by the author is to present all the matters brought before both the PCIJ and ICJ in full and to present the new requirements on the part of the ICJ that have been formulated in recent years. The book is aimed at law students, lecturers and those working in the field of international law. Ewa Sałkiewicz-Munnerlyn was a Polish diplomat working for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs from 1991 to 2018. She was appointed charge d’affaires at the Polish Embassy to the Holy See from 1993-1994, after which she served as the Polish consul at the Consular Division of the Polish Embassy in Washington D.C. from 1995-1999. She then held the position of Human Rights Officer of the OSCE in Macedonia (Skopje and Ohrid) and Bosnia and Hercegovina (Pale in Republika Srbska) from 2001-2005 and has also several times worked as a short-term observer of the OSCE during parliamentary and presidential elections in Ukraine, Russia, Moldova and Belarus. She attained a Ph.D. at the Jagiellonian University in Krakow, Poland and a post-graduate diploma at the Institut des Hautes Etudes Internationales in Geneva, Switzerland.

Since the decision of the International Court of Justice in LaGrand (Germany v United States of America), the law of provisional measures has expanded dramatically both in terms of the volume of relevant decisions and the complexity of their reasoning. Provisional Measures before International Courts and Tribunals seeks to describe and evaluate this expansion, and to undertake a comparative analysis of provisional measures jurisprudence in a range of significant international courts and tribunals so as to situate interim relief in the wider procedure of those adjudicative bodies. The result is the first comprehensive examination of the law of provisional measures in over a decade, and the first to compare investor-state arbitration jurisprudence with more traditional inter-state courts and tribunals.

2 Dispute Settlement Under UNCLOS

International human rights adjudicators, while facing urgent cases, have used provisional measures in order to prevent irreparable harm, e.g. to order States to halt an expulsion, the execution of a death sentence, the destruction of the natural habitat, as well as to ensure access to health care in detention or protection against death threats. In the practice of the various adjudicators, the traditional concept of provisional measures has undergone a process of humanization. Preventing Irreparable Harm addresses the question of how such provisional measures can be made as persuasive as possible. Apart from the Inter-American Court, none of the human rights adjudicators motivate or publish their provisional measures. Yet the book analyzes their best practices and obstacles, determines the underlying rationale for their use of provisional measures, and establishes the core of the concept of provisional measures that all adjudicators have in common. It argues that clarity - on what belongs to the core of the concept and on what does not belong to the concept at all - enhances the persuasive force of provisional measures. The practices of the international adjudicators that are made accessible in this book will prove useful in the ongoing cross-fertilization that occurs among these adjudicators. Moreover, the analysis provided allows individual victims, their counsel, NGOs, as well as international institutions, to address more effectively urgent human rights cases.

Exploring the role of the International Court of Justice in the re-convergence of international law, this book contends that the court's jurisprudence is transforming traditional concepts such as sovereignty, rights and jurisdiction and in so doing is leading a trend towards the reunification of international law.

This book makes a significant contribution to the comprehension of the law and practice of provisional measures issued by international courts and tribunals, including international commercial arbitration. After having analyzed the common features of provisional measures, it provides an overview of the peculiarities of these orders within the context of different international proceedings (e.g. the ICJ, the ITLOS, the CJEU, the ICC, human rights courts and investment arbitration). In this regard, the book is valuable in offering a broad and rigorous comparative analysis between the various forms of provisional measures. Owing to its original cross-cutting and case-driven approach, the book will be an essential tool for both scholars and practitioners dealing with the law of provisional measures in international adjudication. Indeed, this book will be an important novelty in international law libraries due to the broad range of regimes scrutinized and to a detailedanalysis of the general trends within the contemporary law of provisional measures. Fulvio Maria Palombino is Professor of International Law in the Department of Law at the University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy. Roberto Virzo is Associate Professor of International Law in the Department of Law, Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods (DEMM) at the University of Sannio, Benevento, Italy. Giovanni Zarra is Adjunct Professor of International Law in the Department of Law at the University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.

The International Court of Justice is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, and epitomizes the very notion of international judicial institution. Yet, it decides inter-State disputes only with the parties’ consent. This makes it more similar to international arbitral tribunals than other international courts. However, the permanent nature of the Court, the predetermination of procedural rules by the Statute and the Rules of Court, the public character of proceedings, the opportunity for third States to intervene in a case under Articles 62 and 63 of the Statute and the Court's role as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations mark a structural difference between the ICJ and non-institutionalized international arbitral tribunals. This book analyses if and to what extent these features have influenced the approach of the ICJ (and of the PCIJ before it) to its own judicial function and have led it to depart from the principles established in international arbitration.

Contracts are relevant, frequently central, for a significant number of investment disputes. Yet, the way tribunals ascertain their content remains largely underexplored. How do tribunals interpret contracts in investment treaty arbitration? How should they interpret contracts? Does national law have any role to play? Contract Interpretation in Investment Treaty Arbitration: A Theory of the Incidental Issue addresses these questions. The monograph offers a valuable insight into the practice and theory of contract interpretation in investment treaty arbitration. By proposing a theoretical frame for seamless integration of contract interpretation into the overall structure of decision-making, the book contributes to predictability, coherence, sufficiency and correctness of the tribunals’ interpretative practices in investment treaty arbitration.