{"id":6377,"date":"2013-01-14T00:25:24","date_gmt":"2013-01-14T00:25:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/lawin.org\/?p=6377"},"modified":"2013-01-14T00:25:24","modified_gmt":"2013-01-14T00:25:24","slug":"list-of-international-law-selected-cases-by-subject","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/list-of-international-law-selected-cases-by-subject\/","title":{"rendered":"List of International Law Selected Cases, by Subject"},"content":{"rendered":"<h1>List of International Law Selected Court Decisions, by Subject in Europe<\/h1>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Case Tel-Oren v. Libyan Arab Republic: The Law of Nations Contemporary International Law<\/li>\n<li>Case The Case of Parking Privileges for Diplomats: when is International law really law?<\/li>\n<li>Case North Sea Continental Shelf Cases: The Positivist School of International Law<\/li>\n<li>Case Raulin v. Fischer: The Romano-Germanic Civil Law System<\/li>\n<li>Case Libyan American Oil Company (LIAMCO) v. Government of the Libyan Arab Republic: The Islamic Law System<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 2 &#8211; THE SOURCES AND SCOPE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW<br \/>\nA. THE MAKING OF INTERNATIONAL LAW<br \/>\nB. SOURCES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW<br \/>\nC. TREATIES AND CONVENTIONS<br \/>\nReading 2-1. The Importance of International Treaties<br \/>\nReading 2-2. The Functions and Differing Legal Character of Treaties<br \/>\nCase 2-1. Legal Status of Eastern Greenland<br \/>\nAdoption<br \/>\nConsent<br \/>\nEntry into Force<br \/>\nReservations<br \/>\nCase 2-2. Reservations to the Convention on Genocide Case<br \/>\nApplication<br \/>\nInterpretation<br \/>\nValidity<br \/>\nTermination<br \/>\nCase 2-3. Fisheries Jurisdiction Case (Jurisdiction)<br \/>\nD. CUSTOM<br \/>\nCase 2-4. State v. Petane<br \/>\nCase 2-5. The Asylum Case<br \/>\nE. GENERAL PRINCIPLES<br \/>\nCase 2-6. North Sea Continental Shelf Cases<br \/>\nF. SUBSIDIARY SOURCES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW<br \/>\nPublicists<br \/>\nDecisions<br \/>\nEx Aequo et Bono<br \/>\nG. THE SCOPE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW<br \/>\nDualism<br \/>\nMonism<br \/>\nReading 2-3. Monism v. Dualism<br \/>\nMonism-Naturalism<br \/>\nCoordinationism<br \/>\nThe Scope of International Law in Federal States<br \/>\nCase 2-7. Commonwealth of Australia v. Tasmania<br \/>\nH. THE SCOPE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW IN ACTUAL PRACTICE<br \/>\nThe Practice in International Tribunals<br \/>\nCase 2-8. Brazilian Loans Case<br \/>\nThe Practice in Municipal Courts<br \/>\nCase 2-9. Sei Fujii v. State<br \/>\nCase 2-10. Tang Ping-Hoi v. Attorney General<br \/>\nCHAPTER QUESTIONS<br \/>\nREVIEW PROBLEM<br \/>\nChapter 3 &#8211; STATES<br \/>\nIntroduction<br \/>\nA. THE INTERNATIONAL PERSONALITY OF STATES<br \/>\nInchoate States<br \/>\nCase 3-1. Elsen v. Le Patrimoine Insurance Co.<br \/>\nDependent States<br \/>\nIndependent States<br \/>\nB. SELF-DETERMINATION<br \/>\nCase 3-2. Guinea-Bissau v. Senegal<br \/>\nC. RECOGNITION OF STATES AND GOVERNMENTS<br \/>\nDeclaratory Doctrine<br \/>\nCase 3-3. M. Salimoff &amp; Co. et al v. Standard Oil of New York<br \/>\nConstitutive Doctrine<br \/>\nCase 3-4. International Registration of Trademark Case<br \/>\nEffect of Recognizing Governments<br \/>\nCase 3-5. Civil Air Transport, Inc. v. Central Air Transport Corp.<br \/>\nCase 3-5a &#8211; Matimak Trading Co. v. Khalily icon-update.gif (168 bytes)<br \/>\nEstrada Doctrine<br \/>\nReading 3-1. Statement of Mexican Foreign Minister Estrada, 1930<br \/>\nUnofficial Relations<br \/>\nEffect of Not Recognizing Governments<br \/>\nD. TERRITORIAL SOVEREIGNTY<br \/>\nCase 3-6. Nuclear Tests Case<br \/>\nCase 3-7. The Trail Smelter Arbitration<br \/>\nAcquisition of Territory Occupation State Succession<br \/>\nCase 3-8. Status of Goa<br \/>\nRecognition and Estoppel<br \/>\nIntertemporal Law<br \/>\nPolitical Arguments<br \/>\nE. RIGHTS UPON STATE SUCCESSION<br \/>\nTreaties<br \/>\nClaims for Injuries<br \/>\nNationality<br \/>\nPublic Property<br \/>\nCase 3-9. The Union of Burma v. Kotaro Toda<br \/>\nCase 3-10. Simon v. Taylor and another<br \/>\nPrivate Property<br \/>\nCase 3-11. West Rand Central Gold Mining Co., Ltd. v. the King<br \/>\nCase 3-12. Dupont v. Belgium (Minister of Finance)<br \/>\nCHAPTER QUESTIONS<br \/>\nREVIEW PROBLEM<br \/>\nChapter 4 &#8211; INTERNATIONAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS<br \/>\nA. INTRODUCTION<br \/>\nCategories of Intergovermental Organizations<br \/>\nB. LEGAL PERSONALITY<br \/>\nCase 4-1. Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United Nations<br \/>\nCreation and Recognition<br \/>\nCase 4-2. Arab Monetary Fund v. Hashim and others (No. 3)<br \/>\nTermination and Succession<br \/>\nCase 4-3. South-West Africa Cases<br \/>\nC. POWERS OF INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS<br \/>\nTreaty-Making Powers<br \/>\nEspousal of Claims<br \/>\nPrivileges and Immunities<br \/>\nRight of Mission<br \/>\nCase 4-4. Advisory Opinion on the Applicability of Article VI, Section 22, of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations<br \/>\nAdministration of Territory<br \/>\nD. INTERPRETATION OF CHARTERS<br \/>\nCase 4-5. The Legality of a System for the Selective Adjustment of Coffee Quotas<br \/>\nE. RELATIONS WITH MEMBERS<br \/>\nResponsibility of Members for the Obligations of Intergovernmental Organizations<br \/>\nCase 4-6. Westland Helicopters, Ltd. v. Arab Organization for Industrialization<br \/>\nResolution of Disputes between Members<br \/>\nF. RELATIONS WITH OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS<br \/>\nG. UNIVERSAL ORGANIZATIONS<br \/>\nThe United Nations<br \/>\nThe General Assembly<br \/>\nCase 4-7. Texaco Overseas Petroleum Co. and California Asiatic Oil Co. v. the Libyan Arab Republic<br \/>\nThe Security Council<br \/>\nCase 4-8. The Mayotte Island Question<br \/>\nThe Secretariat<br \/>\nThe International Court of Justice, the Trusteeship Council, and the Economic and Social Council<br \/>\nThe Specialized Agencies of the United Nations<br \/>\nH. SUPRANATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS<br \/>\nThe European Union<br \/>\nThe Institutions of the European Union<br \/>\nCase 4-9. The ERTA Case<br \/>\nCase 4-10. S.A. Roquette Freres v. Council of the European Community<br \/>\nCase 4-11. Eunomia di Porro &amp; Co. v. Italian Ministry of Public Education<br \/>\nI. OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS<br \/>\nGeneral Intergovernmental Organizations<br \/>\nReading 4-1. The Organization of American States<br \/>\nSpecialized Intergovernmental Organizations<br \/>\nCHAPTER QUESTIONS<br \/>\nREVIEW PROBLEM<br \/>\nChapter 5 &#8211; INTERNATIONAL NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS<br \/>\nIntroduction<br \/>\nA. NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS<br \/>\nCreation<br \/>\nRecognition<br \/>\nInternational Personality<br \/>\nCase 5-1. Jenni v. Conseil d&#8217;\u00e9tat of the Canton of Geneva<br \/>\nPrivileges and Immunities<br \/>\nB. FORMER STATES<br \/>\nCase 5-2. Nanni v. Pace and the Sovereign Order of Malta<br \/>\nC. MULTINATIONAL ENTERPRISES<br \/>\nThe Form and Structure of Multinational Enterprises<br \/>\nCase 5-3. Barcelona Traction, Light, and Power Company, Ltd. Case<br \/>\nD. INTERNATIONAL REGULATION OF MULTINATIONAL ENTERPRISES<br \/>\nE. HOME STATE REGULATION OF MULTINATIONAL ENTERPRISES<br \/>\nUnfair Competition Laws<br \/>\nCase 5-4. United States v. Aluminum Co. of America<br \/>\nCase 5-5. The Aniline Dyes Case<br \/>\nOpposition to the Extraterritorial Application of Unfair Competition Laws<br \/>\nCase 5-6. Midland Bank, Plc. v. Laker Airways, Ltd.<br \/>\nProduct Liability Laws<br \/>\nCase 5-7. World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson<br \/>\nCase 5-8. Dow Chemical Company v. Castro Alfaro<br \/>\nSharp Practices<br \/>\nCase 5-9. United States v. McLean<br \/>\nF. HOST STATE REGULATION OF MULTINATIONAL ENTERPRISES<br \/>\nConsent to the Jurisdiction of the Host State<br \/>\nCase 5-10. Jadbranska Slobodna Plovidba v. Oysa, Ltd.<br \/>\nCommon Enterprise Liability<br \/>\nPiercing the Company Veil<br \/>\nCase 5-11. Garden Contamination Case (No. 2)<br \/>\nG. SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES BETWEEN MULTINATIONAL ENTERPRISES AND STATES<br \/>\nCase 5-12. Liberian Eastern Timber Corp. (LETCO) v. Liberia<br \/>\nCHAPTER QUESTIONS<br \/>\nREVIEW PROBLEM<br \/>\nChapter 6 &#8211; THE INDIVIDUAL AND HUMAN RIGHTS<br \/>\nIntroduction<br \/>\nCase 6-1. De Sanchez v. Banco Central de Nicaragua<br \/>\nA. HISTORY OF HUMAN RIGHTS LAW<br \/>\nPrecursors to Contemporary Human Rights Law<br \/>\nThe Incorporation of Human Rights Law in the United Nations Charter<br \/>\nThe Evolution of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights<br \/>\nThe Evolution of Regional Human Rights Organizations<br \/>\nThe Protection of Human Rights Today<br \/>\nReading 6-1. The Status of Individuals in International Law<br \/>\nB. SUBSTANTIVE HUMAN RIGHTS LAW<br \/>\nThe United Nations Charter<br \/>\nCase 6-2. Re Drummond Wren<br \/>\nUniversal Declaration of Human Rights<br \/>\nCase 6-3. Filartiga v. Pena-Irala<br \/>\nThe United Nations Covenants on Human Rights<br \/>\nOther United Nations Human Rights Laws<br \/>\nCase 6-4. Opinion No. 2<br \/>\nCase 6-5. Ephrahim v. Pastory and Kaizilege<br \/>\nHuman Rights Law in Europe<br \/>\nCase 6-6. The Satantic Verses Case<br \/>\nHuman Rights Law in the Americas<br \/>\nCase 6-7. Restrictions to the Death Penalty<br \/>\nHuman Rights Law in Africa<br \/>\nC. PROCEDURAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW<br \/>\nProcedures Followed by the International Court of Justice<br \/>\nCase 6-8. Interpretation of the Peace Treaties with Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania<br \/>\nProcedures Followed by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights<br \/>\nOther United Nations Human Rights Forums<br \/>\nCase 6-9. Almeida de Quinteros and Quniteros Almeida v. Uruguay<br \/>\nProcedures for Protecting Human Rights in Europe<br \/>\nProcedures for Protecting Human Rights in the Americas<br \/>\nCase 6-10. In the Matter of Viviana Gallardo et al.<br \/>\nProcedures for Protecting Human Rights in Africa<br \/>\nProcedures for Protecting Human Rights in Municipal Courts<br \/>\nCase 6-11. Simsek v. Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs and another<br \/>\nCHAPTER QUESTIONS<br \/>\nREVIEW PROBLEM<br \/>\nChapter 7 &#8211; RESPONSIBILITIES OF STATES FOR THE TREATMENT OF ALIENS AND FOREIGN BUSINESSES<br \/>\nIntroduction<br \/>\nA. STATE RESPONSIBILITY<br \/>\nDoctrine of Imputability<br \/>\nCase 7-1. Youmans v. United Mexican States<br \/>\nNonimputable Acts<br \/>\nCase 7-2. Home Missionary Society Claim<br \/>\nFault and Causation<br \/>\nCase 7-3. The Kummerow and Fulda Cases<br \/>\nB. STANDARD OF CARE<br \/>\nThe National Standard<br \/>\nCase 7-4. Cantero Herrera v. Canevaro &amp; Co.<br \/>\nThe International Standard Expropriation<br \/>\nCase 7-5. Acsyngo v. Compagnie de Saint-Gobain (France), S.A.<br \/>\nCase 7-6. Barcelona Traction, Light, and Power Company, Ltd. Case (Second Phase)<br \/>\nDenial of Justice<br \/>\nCase 7-7. Chattin v. United Mexican States<br \/>\nC. OBJECTIONS<br \/>\nLack of Standing<br \/>\nNationality of the Claim<br \/>\nGenuine Link<br \/>\nCase 7-8. Barcelona Traction, Light, and Power Company, Ltd. Case (Second Phase)<br \/>\nExhaustion of Remedies<br \/>\nOther Objections<br \/>\nD. RELIEF<br \/>\nCase 7-9. Chorz\u00f3w Factory Case (Indemnity) (Merits)<br \/>\nE. INSURANCE<br \/>\nNational Investment Guaranty Programs<br \/>\nCase 7-10. In the Matter of Revere Copper and Brass, Inc. and Overseas Private Investment Corporation<br \/>\nMultilateral Investment Guaranty Programs<br \/>\nF. BINDING ARBITRATION<br \/>\nCHAPTER QUESTIONS<br \/>\nREVIEW PROBLEM<br \/>\nChapter 8 &#8211; THE ENVIRONMENT: SEA, AIRSPACE, OUTER SPACE, AND POLAR REGIONS<br \/>\nIntroduction<br \/>\nA. LAW OF THE SEA<br \/>\nReading 8-1. Refusal of the United States to Ratify the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea<br \/>\nThe Baselines<br \/>\nInternal Waters<br \/>\nCase 8-1. Public Prosecutor v. J. O.<br \/>\nCase 8-2. Wildenhus&#8217; Case<br \/>\nTerritorial Sea<br \/>\nCase 8-3. Corfu Channel Case (Merits)<br \/>\nArchipelagic Waters<br \/>\nContiguous Zone<br \/>\nCase 8-4. State v. Sorensen and Jensen<br \/>\nContinental Shelf<br \/>\nReading 8-2. The Truman Proclamation on the Continental Shelf, 1945<br \/>\nExclusive Economic Zone<br \/>\nReading 8-3. Adoption of an Exclusive Economic Zone by the United States<br \/>\nHigh Seas<br \/>\nCase 8-5. Castle John and Nederlandse Stichting Sirius v. NV Mabeco and NV Parfin<br \/>\nDeep Seabed<br \/>\nMaritime Boundaries<br \/>\nCase 8-6. Case Concerning Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Gulf of Maine Area<br \/>\nLandlocked States<br \/>\nB. AIRSPACE<br \/>\nCase 8-7. Korean Airlines Flight 007<br \/>\nCase 8-8. Silberwacht v. Attorney-General<br \/>\nC. OUTER SPACE<br \/>\nCase 8-9. The Cosmos 954 Incident<br \/>\nD. POLAR REGIONS<br \/>\nCase 8-10. Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Massey and National Science Foundation<br \/>\nE. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION<br \/>\nRegulation of Pollution<br \/>\nCase 8-11. Werkgroep Noordzee et al v. Minister for Public Health and Environmental Matters<br \/>\nProtection of Natural Resources<br \/>\nCase 8-12. In the Matter of United States Restrictions on Imports of Tuna<br \/>\nCase 8-12a &#8211; United States\u2014Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products icon-update.gif (168 bytes)<br \/>\nLiability for Environmental Damage<br \/>\nCHAPTER QUESTIONS<br \/>\nREVIEW PROBLEM<br \/>\nChapter 9 &#8211; DISPUTE SETTLEMENT<br \/>\nA. SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES THROUGH DIPLOMACY<br \/>\nCase 9-1. The Rainbow Warrior Incident<br \/>\nB. SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES IN INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS<br \/>\nInternational Court of Justice<br \/>\nCase 9-2. Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and Against Nicaragua (Jurisdiction and Admissibility) (Dissenting Opinion)<br \/>\nPermanent Court of Arbitration<br \/>\nInternational Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes<br \/>\nCase 9-3. Amco Asia Corp. et al. v. Indonesia (Provisional Measures)<br \/>\nCase 9-4. Liberian Eastern Timber Corporation v. Liberia<br \/>\nC. SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES IN MUNICIPAL COURTS<br \/>\nJurisdiction in Criminal Cases<br \/>\nCase 9-5. Attorney General of the Government of Israel v. Eichmann<br \/>\nJurisdiction in Civil Cases<br \/>\nCase 9-6. Amco Transworld, Inc. v. M\/V Bambi<br \/>\nCase 9-6a &#8211; Bumper Development Corp., Ltd. v. Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and Others (Union of India and Others, Claimants) icon-update.gif (168 bytes)<br \/>\nD. IMMUNITIES OF STATES FROM THE JURISDICTION OF MUNICIPAL COURTS<br \/>\nSovereign or State Immunity<br \/>\nCase 9-7. Sanders v. Veridiano<br \/>\nCase 9-8. Trendtex Trading Corporation v. Central Bank of Nigeria<br \/>\nAct of State Doctrine<br \/>\nCase 9-9. Banco Nacional de Cuba v. Sabbatino<br \/>\nCase 9-9a &#8211; Regina v. Bartle and the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Others (Ex Parte Pinochet) icon-update.gif (168 bytes)<br \/>\nE. CHOOSING THE GOVERNING LAW<br \/>\nAgreement of the Parties<br \/>\nStatutory Choice of Law Provisions<br \/>\nMost Significant Relationship<br \/>\nCase 9-10. Bank of India v. Gobindram Naraindas Sadhwani and others<br \/>\nGovernmental Interest<br \/>\nCase 9-11. Reyno v. Piper Aircraft Company (Trial Court Decision)<br \/>\nF. REFUSAL TO EXERCISE JURISDICTION<br \/>\nCase 9-12. Piper Aircraft Company v. Reyno (Supreme Court Decision)<br \/>\nG. PROVING FOREIGN LAW<br \/>\nCase 9-13. Leary v. Gledhill<br \/>\nH. RECOGNITION OF FOREIGN JUDGMENTS<br \/>\nCHAPTER QUESTIONS<br \/>\nREVIEW PROBLEM<br \/>\nChapter 10 &#8211; WAR<br \/>\nA.WAR AND WARFARE<br \/>\nWhat Is &#8220;War&#8221;?<br \/>\nCase 10-1. Dalmia Cement, Ltd. v. National Bank of Pakistan<br \/>\nB. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND TO THE MODERN LAW OF WAR<br \/>\nC. WAR IN THE ERA OF THE UNITED NATIONS<br \/>\nActions Undertaken or Authorized by the United Nations<br \/>\nCase 10-2. The Spanish Question<br \/>\nCase 10-3. Economic Sanctions Against Rhodesia<br \/>\nCase 10-4. Certain Expenses of the United Nations Case<br \/>\nSelf-Defense<br \/>\nCase 10-5. The Entebbe Incident<br \/>\nCase 10-6. The Falkland Islands War<br \/>\nReading 10-1. The &#8220;Necessary and Proportionate&#8221; Requirement<br \/>\nReprisals<br \/>\nRegional Defense Arrangements<br \/>\nCase 10-7. Rex v. Mngomezulu and others<br \/>\nCollective Self-Defense<br \/>\nCase 10-8. Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities In and Against Nicaragua (Merits) Civil Wars<br \/>\nCase 10-9. Spanish Civil War Pension Entitlement Case<br \/>\nD. CONTEMPORARY LAW OF WARFARE<br \/>\nUnlawful Objectives<br \/>\nUnlawful Methods<br \/>\nUnlawful Means<br \/>\nReading 10-2. Environmental Terrorism<br \/>\nReading 10-3. The Second World War Debate over the Legality of Strategic Bombing<br \/>\nCase 10-10. The Shimoda Case<br \/>\nHumanitarian Rules<br \/>\nCase 10-11. The Tokyo War Crimes Trial<br \/>\nEnforcement<br \/>\nCase 10-12. United States v. First Lieutenant William L. Calley, Jr.<br \/>\nCase 10-13. The Nuremberg Judgment<br \/>\nCase 10-13a &#8211; Prosecutor v. Kupreskic icon-update.gif (168 bytes)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>List of International Law Selected Court Decisions, by Subject in Europe  &nbsp;   \t Case Tel-Oren v. Libyan Arab Republic: The Law of Nations Contemporary International Law  \t Case The Case of Parking Privileges for Diplomats: when is International law really law?  \t Case North Sea [&#8230;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[254,190,10,52],"tags":[118,82],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6377"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6377"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6377\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6377"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6377"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6377"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}