This is the old version of the H2O platform and is now read-only. This means you can view content but cannot create content. You can access the new platform at https://opencasebook.org. Thank you.
Edit playlist item notes below to have a mix of public & private notes, or:MAKE ALL NOTES PUBLIC (0/26 playlist item notes are public) MAKE ALL NOTES PRIVATE (26/26 playlist item notes are private)
|1||Show/Hide More||Class 1: Making Sense of International Law|
|1.1||Show/Hide More||How can Canada protect Egyptian children from afar?|
|3||Show/Hide More||Class 3: States as one of the pillars of international law|
States are one of the most important actors of international law. They create and codify international law via treaties and other agreements, are the main participants in international organizations, and also help enforce international law rules. At the core of the states is the concept of sovereignty, which basically means “authority” or “control” to govern, and rule.
One important question is: how does sovereignty emerge? where does it come from? A related question is: how do states gain statehood? what are the requirements of being a state? and, who decides whether these requirements are met? In this unit, we will discuss these and other related issues.
|4||Show/Hide More||Class 4: State recognition: Importance and effects in international law|
|5||Show/Hide More||Class 5: Special assignment: Micronations|
|6||Show/Hide More||Class 6: Non-state actors: Responsibility for violation of international law|
|6.1||Show/Hide More||Kiobel et al v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. et al 133 S.Ct. 1659 (2013)|
Nigerian nationals filed a putative class action in US courts against certain Dutch, British, and Nigerian corporations for aiding and abetting the Nigerian government in committing international law violations (beating, raping, killing, arresting individuals, and destroying and looting property). The basis for their claim is the Alien Tort Statute (28 U.S.C. Section 1350). The central questions posed to the Court were:
1. Under the Alien Tort Statute, are corporations immune from tort liability for violations of the law of nations, such as torture, extrajudicial executions, or genocide?
2. Upon reargument, does the Alien Tort Statute allow courts to recognize a cause of action for violations of the law of nations occurring within the territory of a sovereign other than the United States?
|7||Show/Hide More||Class 7: Reparation of Injuries Suffered in Service of the U.N., Advisory Opinion, 1949 I.C.J. 174 (Apr. 11)|
|8||Show/Hide More||Class 8: Treaties 1: Negotiation, and conclusion under United States law|
|11||Show/Hide More||Class 11: Treaties 4: Treaty Termination Lisbon Treaty/Art. 2, Section 2 US Constitution/Kucinich v. Bush|
|12||Show/Hide More||Class 12: International courts 1: The International Court of Justice|
|13||Show/Hide More||Class 13: International courts 2: The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia|
|14||Show/Hide More||Class14: International courts 3: The Permanent Court of Arbitration|
|14.1||Show/Hide More||Discussion notes|
Is there a difference between state-to-state arbitration and a preeceeding before the ICJ? What are the perceived advantages if any of state-to-state arbitration? What is the basis of jurisdiction in Philippines v. China case?
Arbitration v. Legal Process
China Issue: Is this a maritime dispute? If it is China agreed only to be bound to resolve via negotiation.
Philippines Issue: They are infringing on our right to use that territory.
|14.2||Show/Hide More||Class 14: IN THE MATTER OF THE SOUTH CHINA SEA ARBITRATION (Philippines v. China)-Excerpts|
|15||Show/Hide More||Class 15: International Courts IV: Investor-State Arbitration|
|18||Show/Hide More||Class 19: International perspectives on gun control|
|19||Show/Hide More||Class 21: The War on Terror, Congress, and the President|
|20||Show/Hide More||Class 22: Modern Warfare|