| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Langlet, David, 1977-
(author)
-
Transboundary Transit Pipelines : Reflections on the Balancing of Rights and Interests in Light of the Nord Stream Project
- 2014
-
In: International and Comparative Law Quarterly. - 0020-5893 .- 1471-6895. ; 63:4, s. 977-995
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The Nord Stream project, which comprises two natural gas pipelines in the Baltic Sea, eminently illustrates several of the ambiguities that pertain to the ability of coastal States to regulate the laying and operation of transit pipelines in their exclusive economic zone and, conversely, the extent of the right of other States to carry out such activities. A highly significant issue is how seabed surveys undertaken in preparation for the laying of pipelines should be characterized, and thus regulated, under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. What is to be considered a ‘reasonable measure’ by a coastal State is another crucial issue which, together with the extent of the requirement for consent by the coastal State for any specific pipeline route, are decisive for defining the balance between potentially competing interests relating to submarine transit pipelines.
|
|
| 3. |
- Spiliopoulou Åkermark, Sia
(author)
-
Storms, Foxes, and Nebulous Legal Arguments : Twelve Years of Force against Iraq, 1991-2003
- 2005
-
In: International and Comparative Law Quarterly. - : Cambridge University Press. - 0020-5893 .- 1471-6895. ; 54:1, s. 221-235
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Vaughan Lowe has recently argued that the most important task of international lawyers at times of flux is to identify claims with precision.1 In order to accomplish this task with regard to the issue of use of force in Iraq, it seems necessary to review the main American and British arguments, including the formal legal arguments presented, as well as the relevant reactions of other States over a longer period of time. This will allow us to reveal patterns of argumentation, similarities, and differences in the American and British justifications as well as in the responses of the international community.
|
|
| 4. |
- Almqvist, Jessica
(author)
-
A Human Rights Qritique of European Judicial Review: Counter-terrorism Sanctions
- 2008
-
In: International and Comparative Law Quarterly. - 0020-5893. ; , s. 303-331
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Litigation involving individuals and entities whose financial assets have been frozen and whose names have been blacklisted in the fight against terrorism is on the rise around the world. However, the global ‘securitization’ of terrorism has rendered court performance of judicial review and the provision of remedies in these cases more difficult. What the main judicial challenges are, the need to overcome them, and how they can be overcome, are identified in this article as questions of central concern in an effort to secure the human right of effective access to justice for persons subjected to counter-terrorism sanctions. Special attention is given to the specific challenges facing the Court of Justice in the European Communities, the manner in which it has responded, and outstanding issues.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Linderfalk, Ulf
(author)
-
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes Tribunal, Spyridon Roussalis v Romania, Decision of 7 December 2011
- 2013
-
In: International and Comparative Law Quarterly. - 0020-5893. ; 62:1, s. 241-250
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Abstract in UndeterminedInternational lawyers interested in international investment law and treaty interpretation issues should consider the international award recently delivered by an ICSID Tribunal in the case of Spyridon Roussalis v Romania.1 The case arose out of the privatization of a Romanian warehouse company (SC Malimp SA). On 23 October 1998, another Romanian company (Continent SRL) entered into a share purchase agreement with the Romanian authority for state assets recovery (AVAS) to purchase 372,523 shares in SC Malimp SA, or the equivalent of a 70 per cent interest in the company. Following the acquisition of SC Malimp SA, the name of that company was changed to SC Continent Marine Enterprise SA (or ‘Continent SA’ for short).
|
|
