1.. HARD CASES 5. Legal Rights A. Legislation . . . We might therefore do well to consider how a philosophical judge might develop, in appropriate cases, theories of what legislative purpose and legal principles require. We shall find that he would construct these theories in the same manner as a philosophical referee would construct the character of a game. I have invented, for this purpose, a lawyer of superhuman skill, learning, patience and acumen, whom I shall call Hercules. I suppose that Hercules is a judge in some representative American jurisdiction. I assume that he accepts the main uncontroversial constitutive and regulative rules of the law in his jurisdiction. He accepts, that is, that statutes have the general power to create and extinguish legal rights, and that judges have the general duty to follow earlier decisions of their court or higher courts whose rationale, as l

Taking Rights Seriously

1. Intersections between trade and non-communicable disease 2. Normative integration: using health instruments in interpretation of the WTO covered agreements 3. Freedom to use taxes, subsidies and restrictions on marketing 4. Necessity and regulatory autonomy under the GATT 5. Product regulation and labeling measures under the SPS and TBT agreements 6. Reallocating authority at the international level: delegation, legalisation and harmonisation 7. Conclusion.

/pdf/trade-and-public-health-the-wto-tobacco-alcohol-and-diet-22nk9hjibu.pdf

Trade and Public Health: The WTO, Tobacco, Alcohol, and Diet

The ESIL Conference at which this article was originally presented as the Keynote Speech was devoted to the topic of " International Law in a Heterogeneous World " . The article attempts to demonstrate that heterogeneity does not exclude the universality of international law, as long as the law retains - and further develops - its capacity to accommodate an ever larger measure of such heterogeneity. After developing three different conceptions, or levels, of what the term ' universality ' of international law is intended to capture, the article focuses on international rules, (particularly judicial) mechanisms, and international institutions which serve the purpose of reconciling heterogeneous values and expectations by means of international law. The article links a critical evaluation of these ways and means with the dif- ferent notions of universality by inquiring how they cope with the principal challenges faced by these notions. In so doing, it engages a number of topics which have become immensely popular in contemporary international legal writing, here conceived as challenges to univer- sality: the so-called ' fragmentation ' of international law; in close connection with this fi rst buzzword the challenges posed by what is called the ' proliferation ' of international courts and tribunals; and, fi nally, certain recent problems faced by individuals who fi nd themselves at the fault lines of emerging multi-level international governance. The article concludes that these challenges have not prevented international law from forming a (by and large coher- ent) legal system. Most concerns about the dangers of fragmentation appear overstated. As for the ' proliferation ' of international judicial institutions, the debate on fragmentation has made international judges even more aware of the responsibility they bear for a coherent con- struction of international law. They have managed to develop a set of tools for coping with the * Judge at the International Court of Justice. This article was originally presented as the Keynote Speech at

Universality of International Law from the Perspective of a Practitioner

Partant de l’intuition que la notion d’Etat en droit international et en droit europeen fait apparaitre des elements tellement epars et desordonnes, on a pu demontrer que cette intuition de depart se reflete tres bien dans la realite. En effet, d’une branche a l’autre, on se rend compte que les ordres juridiques etudies offrent une vision polymorphe de la notion d’Etat, sous la forme d’« une figure a geometrie variable ». En explorant les regles d’imputation, les regles de rattachement et les regles d’expression de la volonte de l’Etat, force est de constater que la notion d’Etat peut etre apprehendee du point de vue organique, du point de vue materiel et du point de vue factuel. Au-dela de cette variabilite, il convient de rechercher l’unite fonctionnelle de la notion d’Etat. On en vient, des lors, a la conclusion selon laquelle : la fonction singuliere de la notion d’Etat est sa propension a etre un outil au service des necessites systemiques de l’ordre juridique international et europeen. La notion d’Etat est en effet mobilisee pour servir un objectif particulier, ce qui rend concevable sa geometrie variable. Ainsi, notre these s’evertue a faire ressortir l’unite dans la variabilite. Elle comporte toutefois en filigrane une proposition theorique, celle de « l’Etat fonctionnel ». Par « Etat fonctionnel », nous entendons toute entite qui n’est pas statutairement un Etat, mais qui neanmoins exerce pleinement et entierement des fonctions de nature etatique, et ceci de facon autonome. On vise par-la certaines entites federees (comme celles de la Belgique et le Quebec) et certaines entites secessionnistes ((comme la RTCN) ou des groupes terroriste (comme l’Etat islamique). La theorie de « l’Etat fonctionnel » ne va pas jusqu’a postuler la reconnaissance de la qualite d’Etat a ces entites, mais seulement de les considerer comme tel, de facon ponctuelle, afin de permettre une application effective et efficace de la norme internationale et/ou europeenne.

https://corpus.ulaval.ca/jspui/bitstream/20.500.11794/28108/1/33726.pdf

Notion d'Etat en droit international et en droit européen : de l'impossible approche conceptuelle à la nécessaire approche fonctionnelle

The comment focuses on the construction of time in the normative regime of occupation Beginning (in section 2) with a critique of the ICJ's reading of Article 6 of the Fourth Geneva Convention concerning the scope of applicability ratione temporis of the Convention in cases where the duration of an occupation lasts longer than one year, the comment proceeds (in section 3) to argue (a) that the gap between the working assumption informing Article 6 (of relatively short-term occupations) and reality (of prolonged occupations) defines a problem which the Court erroneously construed as a solution; (b) that the problem of prolonged occupation has allowed for the substitution of an indefinite for a temporary duration of an occupation a move which defies the basic tenets of the normative regime of occupation; and (c) that a proper solution involves the construction of the notion of "reasonable time" into the Fourth Geneva Convention The comment includes (in section 4) a proposal designed to minimize the temporary/indefinite blurring of boundaries in situations where an occupation has not ended within one year

'A la Recherche Du Temps Perdu': Rethinking Article 6 of the Fourth Geneva Convention in the Light of the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory Advisory Opinion

This book analyses factors of change and continuity in the European courts. The first part concerns the role of the European courts in multilevel governance. The second part focuses on basic legal principles, old and new.

Focusing on courts: the techniques of hidden dialogue in the multilevel system

This paper deals with the evolution of investment chapters of Preferential Trade Agreements (PTAs). These separate chapters are comparable to self-standing Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs), and can include both rules on investment liberalisation (non-discrimination safeguards) and on investment protection (standards of treatment afforded by the host State to the foreign investor/investment). The objective is to observe the structure and recurrent patterns of these chapters in order to detect and analyse certain normative trends. The sample of agreements reviewed is limited to the investment agreements concluded (or about to be concluded, when sufficient information is available) by the two major importers and exporters of Foreign Direct Investments (FDIs) – the United States of America and the European Union.After sketching the history and layout of the EU and US systems of investment protection (section 2), section 3 offers a breakdown of the provisions that most effectively illustrates the divide between the two models. In section 4, we examine the current impasse in the new EU’s centralised management of investment policies. Our central claim is then illustrated in section 5: in the long term, the US (NAFTA-like) template is likely to prevail over the European one, because it satisfies the need to fill the gaps in incomplete treaty regimes like those of European BITs. The Canada-EU Trade Agreement (CETA) seems to confirm this trend. In light of these remarks, we observe that future pluri- and multilateral negotiations will increasingly lean towards the NAFTA-model and gradually distance themselves from the European BIT standard (section 6).

The Inevitable Convergence of the US and the EU on the Protection of Foreign Investments – BITs, PTAs, and Incomplete Contracts

/pdf/jurisdiction-and-admissibility-in-investment-arbitration-the-2jiay3pxl6.pdf

Jurisdiction and Admissibility in Investment Arbitration: The Practice and the Theory

Between 2005 and 2008 the European Court of Justice has displayed courage and patience, often endorsing a cautious but evolutionary interpretation of the Treaties. By doing so, the Court managed to ensure the consistency of a legal order that has undergone continuous amendments (see the Constitution and the Lisbon Treaty bottlenecks). The expansive use of First Pillar’s legal principles allowed a first praetorian constitutionalisation of the Area of Freedom Security and Justice, and so has the application by the Court of Art. 47 EU, which reinforced the primacy of the First Pillar over the other two. This article examines these mentioned judicial policies, as well as the new urgent preliminary ruling procedure, describing the Court’s behaviour when the boundaries of its competence are questioned. Possible activist trends underpinning the Court’s choices are remarked, bearing in mind the innovations that the Reform Treaty is supposed to bring about, and the commitment the Court has always shown in the continuous attempt of fixing the everchanging European legal order’s constitutional structure. Key-words: European Court of Justice, Pillars, Reform Treaty, Art. 47 Treaty of European Union, Data Protection Author, please provide abstract.

Filippo Fontanelli

Papers

Focusing on courts: the techniques of hidden dialogue in the multilevel system

The Inevitable Convergence of the US and the EU on the Protection of Foreign Investments – BITs, PTAs, and Incomplete Contracts

Jurisdiction and Admissibility in Investment Arbitration: The Practice and the Theory

The Court Goes ‘All in’

E D’Alterio, La funzione di regolazione delle corti nello spazio amministrativo globale