legal personality in international law - assets -...
TRANSCRIPT
INDEX
Abyssinian crisis (1934), 139, 217ACTA (Alien Tort Claims Act; US law)
jurisprudence on jus cogensviolations, 154, 162–7
actor conception, 208–42actual and normative, relationship
between, 245, 264–8, 269as additional conception rather than
alternative terminology, 3American realismeffective participation andinternational realism, 223–8
origins of actor conception in,213–17
rule-sceptic legal realism, 217–23assumptions no longer supported by
current practice, 3, 243, 248,268–70
authoritative decision-makingprocess, international lawviewed as (rule-sceptic view oflaw), 211–12, 213, 217–23,258, 264
basic propositions of, 210–13compared to other conceptions,
245–8defined, 14, 208dichotomy between subjects/persons
and objects rejected by,210–11
effective power to participate, 212,213, 223–8
evaluation of. See evaluation ofconceptions of internationallegal personality
international organizationsBIS as, 210, 228–32
international personality of, 23ITC cases and objective reality ofinternational personality of,210, 233–9
legal practice, main manifestationsin, 228
non-state actors in, 24pragmatist philosophy and, 213,
220–3Reparation for Injuries case and, 102,
104, 236Sandline v. Papua New Guinea and,
210, 239–42state contracts under, 27, 239–42untenability of, 3
aggressive war, 156–8Ago, Roberto, viii, 162Al-Adsani v. United Kingdom (ECHR,
2001), 171, 172, 262, 273Albania and Corfu Channel case
(United Kingdom v. Albania,ICJ, 1949), 262
Alien Tort Claims Act (ACTA; US law)jurisprudence on jus cogensviolations, 154, 162–7
Alvarez, Alejandro, 126, 139Amco v. Indonesia (ICSID,
1984–1990), 77, 197,204–7, 281
America. See United StatesAmerican Convention on Human
Rights (1969), 253Anglo-American and Continental
approaches, Lauterpacht on,136
Anglo-Iranian Oil Co. case (UnitedKingdom v. Iran, ICJ, 1952), 76
311
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
Anzilotti, Dionisioon Holy See’s international status, 117recognition conception and, 84, 93on states-only conception, 42, 45,
49–50, 58, 59, 63, 64, 68, 71, 72apartheid. See South AfricaArgentina in CAA and Vivendi
Universal v. Argentina (ICSID,2002), 77, 124
as-if philosophy (Vaihinger), 188Asylum case (Colombia v. Peru, ICJ,
1950), 260Atlee, Clement, 155Austin, John, 41Austriaformal conception, Austro-
Hungarian empire, and newAustrian state, 178, 179–83
liberalism, Austrian/Victorian,135–6, 140, 146
Austro-Prussian War (1866), 51auto-limitation of the state
(Selbstbindungslehre), 62Avena case (Mexico v. United States,
ICJ, 2004), 11, 20, 173, 203, 278
Bank for International Settlements(BIS), 86, 89, 210, 228–32, 278
Bankovic v. Belgium et al. (ECHR,2001), 22, 171, 172
Bantustans (South Africanhomelands), 252, 253
Barberis, Julio A., 173Barcelona Traction case (ICJ, 1970), 67,
255, 256, 257Beamtenabkommen (between Poland
and Free City of Danzig, 1921),20, 69–72
Begriffsjurisprudenz, 94–5, 96BelgiumBIS and, 229Yerodia case (Democratic Republic of
the Congo v. Belgium, ICJ,2002), 161
Bentham, Jeremy, 31Bergbohm, Karl, 59, 61, 63Bernadotte, Count, assassination
of, 100
bilateral investment treaties (BITs)private individuals’ interest in, 10state contracts distinguished, 26umbrella clauses, 27
Binding, Karl, 48, 59, 63binding nature of international lawin formal conception, 194–5Grundnorm theory and, 149, 194in recognition conception, 83in states-only conception, 45–6,
62–3bipartite character of customary
international law, 265BIS (Bank for International
Settlements), 86, 89, 210,228–32, 278
Bismarck, Otto von, 51–2, 57BITs. See bilateral investment treatiesBluntschtli, John Caspar, 62Bophuthatswana, recognition as state, 250Bosnia and Herzegovina, 165–7Bosnian Genocide case (Bosnia and
Herzegovina v. Serbia andMontenegro, ICJ, 2007), 161,162, 274
Bosnian Genocide case (Bosnia andHerzegovina v. Yugoslavia, ICJ,1993), 261
Bourquin, Maurice, 126, 151Brierly, James Leslie, 126, 138, 151, 214Britain. See United KingdomBrownlie, Ian, 117, 263
CAA and Vivendi Universal v.Argentina (ICSID, 2002), 27,77, 124
Cameroon, Klöckner Industrie-AnlagenGmbH and Others v. Republic of(ICSID, 1985), 77
Canada, on individual treaty rights toconsular assistance, 203
Cançado Trindade, AntônioAugusto, 128
Carr, E. H., 226Carty, Anthony, 49Cassese, Antonio, 128Catholic Church. See Roman Catholic
Church
312 index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
Catholicism. See PopeCavaglieri, Arrigo, 80, 85, 86, 90, 91,
93, 107Central American Court of Justice, 73centralized law of persons,
international law’s lack of, 9–10Certain Expenses of the United Nations
(ICJ Advisory Opinion, 1962),109
Certain Questions relating to Settlers ofGerman Origin in the Territoryceded by Germany to Poland(Advisory Opinion, PCIJ,1923), 73, 89
choice of law for state contracts, 120–2Churchill, Winston, 155Ciskei, recognition as state, 250Civil War, US, 216, 218Cold War, 217, 223, 226Colombia and Asylum case (Colombia
v. Peru, ICJ, 1950), 260comparison of different conceptions of
international legal personality,245–8
Competence of the ILO to ExamineProposal for the Organizationand Development of theMethods of AgriculturalProduction (PCIJ AdvisoryOpinion, 1922), 108
Competence of the ILO to RegulateIncidentally the Personal Workof the Employer (PCIJ AdvisoryOpinion, 1926), 108
Comte, Auguste, 142, 181concept and conceptions distinguished,
14conceptions or types of international
legal personality, 2, 13–18,29. See also actor conception;formal conception;individualistic conception;recognition conception;states-only conception
comparison of, 245–8evaluation of, 245–70. See also
evaluation of conceptions ofinternational legal personality
concurrent liability of member states ofinternational organizations,233–9
Confederation Treaty of 1815, 51conferral of international
personality. See entries atrecognition
Congo, Democratic Republic of, andYerodia case (2002), 161
Congress of Vienna (1815), 51Constant, Benjamin, 142Constitution, US, Fourteenth
Amendment, 215, 218–19constitutional principles of jus cogens
characterin individualistic conception. See
under individualisticconception
superior to expressions of statewill, in individualisticconception, 127
consular assistance, LaGrand case onindividual treaty rights to, 197
Continental and Anglo-Americanapproaches, Lauterpacht on,136
Continental Shelf (Libya v. Malta, ICJ,1985), 260
contractsbetween states and private
parties. See state contractsVereinbarung (law-making
agreement) between statesdistinguished, 45, 63, 93
Copernican Turn, of Kant, 185Corfu Channel case (United Kingdom
v. Albania, ICJ, 1949), 262corporate personalityformal conception, as international
personality under, 175in private municipal law, 7Trading Companies, historical
international personality of, 34Costa v. Enel (ECJ, 1964), 79Crawford, James, 253creation of law, international legal
personality’s competenceregarding, 8
index 313
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
creation of law (cont.)American legal realist rule-sceptic
view of international law,217–23
formal conception not requiring,173, 176, 177, 196
in late 18th and 19th centuries, 40–1in recognition conception, 83, 84, 93in states-only conception, 64Vattel on, 37–8
criminal law, internationalframework combining formal and
individualistic conceptions incontext of, 273–4, 276, 280
individualistic conception and, 128,154–62
Cumuraswamy opinion (Differencerelating to Immunity from LegalProcess of a Special Rapporteurof the Commission on HumanRights, ICJ Advisory Opinion,1999), 109
customary international lawbipartite character of, 265general versus particular sources of
international law, 245, 257–64non-state actors in framework
combining formal andindividualistic conceptions,280–1
normative force in formalconception, 195–6
opinio iuris, role of, 265–8subjection of non-state actors to, 23–5
Cyprus and TurkeyLoizidou case involving, 167–72Turkish Republic of Northern
Cyprus, recognition of, 250,252, 253
Danzig, Free City ofBeamtenabkommen, 1921, with
Poland, 20, 69–72designated as Free City in Treaty of
Versailles, 68Jurisdiction of the Courts of Danzig,
PCIJ Advisory Opinion on, 12,42, 68–73
Darmon, ECJ Advocate-General, 234,235–6, 237
Das Wesen des Völkerrechts und dieClausula Rebus Sic Stantibus(Kaufmann, 1911), 138
De Jure Belli ac Pacis (Grotius,1625), 32
De la Division du Travail Social(Durkheim, 1893), 144
Declaration of the Rights of Man and ofthe Citizen (1789), 141
Democratic Republic of the Congo, andYerodia case (2002), 161
Denmark and North Sea ContinentalShelf cases (ICJ, 1969), 259–61
Descamps, Baron, 152Designation of the Workers’ Delegate
for the Netherlands at the ThirdSession of the InternationalLabour Conference (PCIJAdvisory Opinion, 1922), 108
Deutsch, Karl W., 226Dewey, John, 214diplomatic protection in international
law, Mavrommatis-formula for,65–8
divine law and international law, 33, 34Doe I v. Unocal Corporation (US Court
of Appeals, 9th Circuit, 2002),166
Dreyfus Affair, France, 137, 140, 142Le Droit des Gens (Vattel, 1758), 31,
35–8, 66Dugard, John, 209, 250Duguit, Leon, 139–46, 151Dunant, Henry, 111Dupuy, Rene-Jean, 119–25Durkheim, Emile, 143, 144Dutch East India Company, 33Dworkin, Ronald, 14
Eastern Carelia, Status of (PCIJAdvisory Opinion, 1923), 108
ECHR. See European Court of HumanRights
ECJ. See European Court of JusticeÉcole de l’exegèse, 148Edwards, Judge, 163–4
314 index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
Elizabeth I (queen of England), 33Emperor and Pope, respublica
christiana under, 33, 35England. See United KingdomEstonia and Panevezys-Saldutiskis
Railway case (Estonia v.Lithuania, PCIJ, 1939), 67
Ethiopia and South West Africajudgment (ICJ, 1966), 255–6
European Convention on HumanRights (1950), 169–70
European Convention for theProtection of Rights andFundamental Freedoms(1950), 253
European Court of Human Rights(ECHR)
Al-Adsani v. United Kingdom(2001), 171, 172, 262, 273
Bankovic v. Belgium et al. (2001),171, 172
individualistic conception informingpractice in, 154, 167–72
Ireland v. United Kingdom (1976),169
Loizidou v. Turkey (1996), 167–72European Court of Justice (ECJ)Costa v. Enel (1964), 79European Economic Area Agreement,
opinion on, 79ITC cases (1990), 22, 110, 210,
233–9, 279Van Gend en Loos case on individual
rights under EEC treaty (1963),21, 42, 64, 77–9, 170, 278
European Union (EU), internationallegal status of, 77–9, 110
evaluation of conceptions ofinternational legal personality,245–70
actual and normative, relationshipbetween, 245, 264–8, 269
assumptions of individualistic andformal conceptions supportedby current practice, 3, 243, 248,268–70
comparison of different conceptions,245–8
individual freedom and statehood,relationship between, 245,254–7, 268
nature and powers of state, 245,248–54, 268
opinio iuris, role of, 265–8recognition, constitutive versus
declaratory nature of, 248–53sources of international law, general
versus particular, 245, 257–64,269
ex post facto principle, 156expropriation law and Reineccius v.
Bank for InternationalSettlements, 228–32
Filartiga v. Pena-Arala (US Court ofAppeals 2nd Circuit, 1980), 163
Final Act of Congress of Vienna(1815), 51
formal conception, 173–207. See alsoframework combining formaland individualistic conceptions
actual and normative, relationshipbetween, 264
in Amco v. Indonesia, on statecontracts, 197, 204–7
Austro-Hungarian empire and newAustrian state, 178, 179–83
basic propositions of, 173–7binding nature of international law
in, 194–5compared to other conceptions,
245–8consequences for international
personality, lack of, 173, 176,177, 191–6
corporate bodies as internationalpersonalities, 175
defined, 13, 173evaluation of. See evaluation of
conceptions of internationallegal personality
implied powers doctrine, 103, 104individual freedom and statehood,
relationship between, 254individuals under, 174, 175,
197–204
index 315
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
formal conception (cont.)is-ought distinction and, 184–6, 188,
192, 265in LaGrand case, on individual treaty
rights, 173, 197–204law-creating competence not
required by, 173, 176, 177, 196legal fiction, international
personality as, 184legal practice, main manifestations
in, 197mechanism of acquisition of
international personalityunder, 174
natural law, exclusion of, 177, 193,195, 196
neo-Kantianism, influence of, 182,185–6
as open concept, 173, 177origins in Kelsen’s theories, 177,
178–83principles of international
personality necessarilyinformed by, 3, 243, 248,268–70
public law theory and, 178, 179, 182,186–9
pure legal positivism of, 177, 181,192–6
recognition, constitutive anddeclaratory nature of, 249
Reparation for Injuries case and, 102,103, 104
sociological perspective rejected by,187, 190, 195
sources of international law in, 177,258, 261, 263
stateidentity with domestic legalsystem, 190
as international personality, 175lack of actual existence, 175, 184,187–90
as legal status rather thanfact, 248
normative theory of, 177, 183–91unified scientific method
influencing, 181
Fornos Diaz v. Guatemala (CentralAmerican Court of Justice,1909), 73
Fourteenth Amendment, USConstitution, 215, 218–19
framework combining formal andindividualistic conceptions,243, 271–81
basic principles of, 271–7criminal contexts, 273–4, 276, 280effective actors, international
personalities as, 273individualsapplicability of treaties to,277–8
as international persons, 272–4international organizations as
international persons, 278–80new framework, problems with
attempting to articulate, 15–16non-state actors in, 280–1openness of system regarding
identity of internationalpersons, 271–2, 276
recognition, role of, 272, 277responsibility as sole consequence of,
275–6, 277rights contexts, 273–4, 276, 280state contracts and, 281states as international persons,
274–5Franceacademic treatment of international
law in, 40BIS and, 229Case Concerning Rights of Nationals
of the United States of Americain Morocco (France v. UnitedStates, ICJ, 1952), 260
individualistic conception, ThirdRepublic, and Dreyfus Affair,136–8, 140, 141
on Lotus case, 266Napoleonic Code Civil, 147natural law, influence of, 50Serbian Loans case, French
bondholders in, 74Franco-German war of 1871, 137
316 index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
freedom, individual, and statehood,relationship between, 245,254–7
French Revolution, 54, 55, 59, 60, 143Freud, Sigmund, 180Friedmann, Wolfgang M., 209Fuller, Lon, 222function of international legal
personality in internationallegal argument, 7–12
fundamental principles of law, inindividualistic conception
ACTA jurisprudence on privateviolations of, 154, 162–7
superiority to expressions of statewill, 127, 133, 147–53
Fusinato, Guido, 97–8
Gaja, Giorgio, 238Gallie, W. B., 14Garcìa Amador, F. V., 123general theory of law and the state
(Kelsen), 177Geneva Conventions and Additional
Protocols, recognition of ICRCin (1864–1949), 111, 113, 114
Geneva Conventions on theContinental Shelf (1958), 259
Gentili, Alberico, 33–5Geny, François, 147–8Gerber, Carl Friedrich, 56, 58, 61, 94, 182German-Polish Convention (1922), 73Germanyacademic treatment of international
law in, 40, 41betweenWorldWars I and II, 84–90,
178, 179BIS, reparations payments through,
86, 89, 210, 228–32Certain Questions relating to Settlers
of German Origin in theTerritory ceded by Germany toPoland (Advisory Opinion,PCIJ, 1923), 73, 89
common will of community of states,international law as, 59–64
Holy Roman Empire and, 50,52–3, 60
individualistic conception andresentment of, 137–9, 147
Italy, influence on, 49–50, 94LaGrand case, on individual treaty
rights under formal conception,197
legal method between World Warsin, 88
liberal-national revolutions of1845–9, 59, 60
Methoden- und Richtungsstreit, 88–9North Sea Continental Shelf cases
(ICJ, 1969), 259–61, 267Nuremberg Judgments and
individualistic conception, 128,154–62
post-World War resentment of,137–9, 147, 217
Prussian-Austrian War (1866), 51recognition conception originating
in, 84–90Reichspublizistik, 52–4, 58, 60social contract theory, rejection of,
52, 53, 54, 55state as historical fact absorbing
individuals in, 52–9state sovereignty, concept of,
140–3states-only conception in
sociopolitical context of 19thcentury, 47–54
unification of, 50–2, 60, 64Gesetzespositivismus, Gerber-Laband,
61, 94, 182Great Britain. See United KingdomGreece and Mavrommatis-formula,
65–8The Grotian Tradition in International
Law (Lauterpacht, 1946), 134Grotius, Hugo, 32, 33–5, 38Grundnorm theory, 149, 192, 194GuatemalaFornos Diaz v. Guatemala (Central
American Court of Justice,1909), 73
Nottebohm case (Liechtenstein v.Guatemala, ICJ, 1955), 67
Guggenheim, Paul, 173
index 317
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
Habsburg monarchy, end of, 180Hackworth, Judge, 104Hart, H. L. A., 14, 218Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrichformal conception and, 190individualistic conception and, 129,
141states-only conception and, 52, 54–6,
58, 62Herz, John H., 226Herzl, Theodor, 135Higgins, Rosalyn, 3, 208, 214, 237historical background, 29, 31–41intellectual history approach to
study of international legalpersonality, 16–18
inter-state law, Vattel’s conceptionof international law as (1758),35–8
law-creationin late 18th and 19th centuries, 40–1Vattel on, 37–8
periodization of, 29practical issues prompting
developments in internationallaw theory, 33
pragmatic application in earlymodern era (late 18th and 19thcenturies), 38–41
separate personality of statein late 18th and 19th centuries,38–40
Vattel on, 35–8web of laws prior to Vattel (Roman
period to 18th century), 32–5Hobbes, Thomas, 36, 38Holmes, Oliver Wendell, 219–22Holy Roman Empire, 50, 52–3, 55, 60Holy See. See also Roman Catholic
Churchas international personality, 115–18as separate international personality
from state of Vatican City,116–18
The Holy See v. Starbright EnterprisesInc. (Philippines SupremeCourt 1994), 118
Huber, Max, 34, 85, 94, 95–6, 97, 98
human rights. See rightsHume, David, 181, 184
IACHR (Inter-American Court ofHuman Rights), 202, 203
ICC (International Criminal Court), onindividual responsibility underinternational criminal law, 161
ICJ. See International Court of JusticeICRC (International Committee of the
Red Cross), 24, 110–14, 280ICSID (International Centre for
Settlement of InvestmentDisputes), 10, 27, 77, 124,204–7
ICTR (International Criminal Tribunalfor Rwanda), on individualresponsibility underinternational criminal law,160, 161
ICTY. See International CriminalTribunal for the FormerYugoslavia
ILC. See International LawCommission
ILO (International LabourOrganization), 108, 159,162, 209
implied powers doctrine, 103, 104IMT (International Military Tribunal)
at Nuremberg, 128, 154–62,273
IMT (International Military Tribunal)for the Far East at Tokyo,155, 160
indeterminacy thesis, 15individual freedom and statehood,
relationship between, 245,254–7, 268
individualistic conception, 126–72. Seealso framework combiningformal and individualisticconceptions
actual and normative, relationshipbetween, 264
basic propositions of, 128–33compared to other conceptions,
245–8
318 index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
constitutional principles of iuscogens character (fundamentalprinciples of law)
ACTA jurisprudence on privateviolations of, 154, 162–7
superiority to expressions of statewill, 127, 133, 147–53
defined, 13, 126ECHR practice reflecting, 154,
167–72evaluation of. See evaluation of
conceptions of internationallegal personality
French socio-political context,136–8, 140, 141
inalienable rights of individualsunder, 131
individual freedom and statehood,relationship between, 254
legal positivism, rejection of, 128–9,134, 138, 147–9, 151, 152
legal practice, main manifestationsin, 154
natural law in, 131–2, 142, 148, 151,153
non liquet, exclusion of, 131, 153Nuremberg Judgments and
international criminal law asprimary manifestation of, 128,154–62
origins in interwar Europe, 128other types of law not rigidly
separated from internationallaw in, 130
principles of internationalpersonality necessarilyinformed by, 3, 243, 248,268–70
recognition of internationalpersonality under, 132
sociological perspective of, 143, 144,148, 151
sources of international law in,131–2, 258, 261, 263
stateactions always exercised byindividual human beings, 130
centrist view, rejection of, 134
consequences of conception for,127, 130–1
as functional entity governed byindividuals, 127, 129–30, 133,139–46
interests of state and individuals,no opposition of, 130
as international personality, 131not necessarily entrustedwith all interests of individuals,130
superiority of constitutionalprinciples of jus cogenscharacter to state will, 127
World War II and, 139individuals in international lawBITs, private individuals’ interest
in, 10under formal conception, 174, 175,
197–204in framework combining formal
and individualisticconceptions
application of treaties, 277–8as international persons, 272–4
in Jellinek’s modification of states-only conception, 57
in Jurisdiction of the Courts ofDanzig Opinion, 68–73, 278
LaGrand case, on individual treatyrights under formal conception,173, 197–204, 278
under Mavrommatis-formula, 65–8,278
significance of different conceptionsfor, 19–21
social contract theory, states-onlyconception rejecting, 52, 53,54, 55
state contracts between individualsand states. See state contracts
in states-only conception, 21, 44, 46,52–9
treaties application of, 77–9,197–204, 277–8
Van Gend en Loos case onapplication of EEC treaty toindividuals, 77–9, 278
index 319
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
IndonesiaAmco v. Indonesia, on state
contracts, 77, 197, 204–7, 281Holy See, recognition of
international status of, 118Institut de Droit National, 233, 237–9institutionalism, social, 94, 96–7, 151intellectual history, study of
international legal personalityas form of, 16–18
Inter-American Court of HumanRights (IACHR), 202, 203
inter-state law, Vattel’s conception ofinternational law as, 35–8
International Centre for Settlement ofInvestment Disputes (ICSID),10, 27, 77, 124, 204–7
International Committee of theRed Cross (ICRC), 24, 110–14,280
International Court of Justice (ICJ). Seealso specific cases and AdvisoryOpinions, by name
on concept of international legalpersonality, 1, 9
on general principles ofinternational law (Article 38),147, 196
on individual and state responsibilityunder international criminallaw, 161
on individual rights in internationallaw, 9, 11
on individual treaty rights underformal conception, 197
on international organizations asinternational persons, 12, 22
Mavrommatis-formula confirmedby, 67
Serbian Loans statement confirmedby, 75
on sources of international law, 9International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights (1966), 253International Criminal Court (ICC),
on individual responsibilityunder international criminallaw, 161
international criminal lawframework combining formal and
individualistic conceptions incontext of, 273–4, 276, 280
individualistic conception and, 128,154–62
International Criminal Tribunal forRwanda (ICTR), on individualresponsibility underinternational criminal law,160, 161
International Criminal Tribunal for theFormer Yugoslavia (ICTY)
on individual responsibilityunder international criminallaw, 160
Prosecutor v. Furundzija (1998), 262,273, 275
Prosecutor v. Simic et al. (1999), 24,111, 113–14, 272, 280
Prosecutor v. Tadic (1995–98), 273International Institute of Agriculture,
97, 98International Labour Organization
(ILO), 108, 159, 162, 209International Law (Oppenheim,
1905–06), 48International Law and Human Rights
(Lauterpacht, 1950), 135International Law Commission (ILC)actor conception and, 233, 237–9on codification of international
personality, 9on diplomatic protection under
Mavrommatis-formula, 65, 68on individuals and international
treaties, 19international law, sources of. See
sources of international lawinternational legal personality, 1–4, 5,
282–3centralized law of persons,
international law’s lack of,9–10
combined frame of reference,243. See also frameworkcombining formal andindividualistic conceptions
320 index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
competence to create law. Seecreation of law, internationallegal personality’s competenceregarding
concept and conceptionsdistinguished, 14
conceptions or types of, 2, 13–18,29. See also actor conception;formal conception;individualistic conception;recognition conception; states-only conception
comparison of, 245–8evaluation of, 245–70. See alsoevaluation of conceptions ofinternational legal personality
consequences of, 2, 3developments in practice regarding,
10–12existing jurisprudence and doctrine,
importance of, 15–16historical background, 29, 31–41. See
also historical backgroundideal types and modified positions, 14intellectual history approach to, 16–18of international organizations, 12,
22–3municipal law and. Seemunicipal lawpresence and function in international
legal argument, 7–12presumptions regarding, 2, 3private individuals and, 10, 19–21significance of, 19–28state contracts and, 25–8terminology for, 1, 3
International Military Tribunal (IMT)at Nuremberg, 128, 154–62, 273
InternationalMilitary Tribunal (IMT) forthe Far East at Tokyo, 155, 160
international organizations asinternational persons, 12, 22–3,80, 94, 97–9, 278–80. See alsospecific organizations
international relations, as academicdiscipline, 226
International Tin Council (ITC) cases(UKCourts, 1987–1989, and ECJ,1990), 22, 110, 210, 233–9, 279
Interpretation of the Agreementbetween WHO and Egyptopinion (ICJ, 1980), 109
IranAnglo-Iranian Oil Co. case (United
Kingdom v. Iran, ICJ, 1952), 76Claims Tribunal, Iran–US, 231Sapphire International Petroleums
Ltd. v. National Iranian OilCompany (1963), 76
Ireland v. United Kingdom (ECHR,1976), 169
is–ought distinction, 184–6, 188, 192,265
Island of Palmas arbitration case(Sole Arbitrator Huber, 1928),34, 95
Israelassassination of UN envoy to, 100British mandate over Palestine, 65as non-member of UN at time of
Reparation for Injuries case, 101Tel-Oren v. Libyan Arab Republic
(US Courts, 1984), 163–4, 165Italyacademic treatment of international
law in, 41German influence on, 49–50, 94Holy See, international personality
of, 115–18legal method between World Wars
in, 88Malta, international personality of
Order of, 119Papal States annexed by, 115recognition conception originating
in, 84–90unification of, 49–50, 64Versailles, loss of Dalmatia in Treaty
of (1919), 87, 89between World Wars, 84–90
ITC (International Tin Council) cases(UK Courts, 1987–1989, andECJ, 1990), 22, 110, 210,233–9, 279
ius cogensgeneral international norms,
peremptory character of, 255
index 321
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
ius cogens (cont.)individualistic conception and
constitutional principles of iuscogens character
ACTA jurisprudence on privateviolations of, 154, 162–7
superiority to expressions of statewill, 127, 133, 147–53
non-state actors in frameworkcombining formal andindividualistic conceptions,280–1
ius gentium, 32Iwonawa v. Ford Motor Company (US
District Court, District of NewJersey, 1999), 166
James, William, 220–1Jellinek, Georgformal conception and, 182recognition conception and, 85, 86,
91, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98states-only conception and, 57–8, 59,
62, 63Jessup, Philip C., 209Jurisdiction of the Courts of Danzig
(PCIJ Advisory Opinion, 1928),12, 20, 42, 64, 68–73, 92, 197,202, 278
Jurisdiction of the EuropeanCommission of the Danube case(PCIJ, 1927), 108
Kadic v. Karadzic I (US District Court,Southern District of New York,1994), 165
Kadic v. Karadzic II (US Court ofAppeals, 2nd Circuit 1995), 24,163, 165–7, 273, 280
Kant, Immanuel, 182, 185–6Karadzic, Radovan, 165–7Kaufmann, Erich, 138Kellogg-Briand Pact (1928), 157Kelsen, Hansactor conception and, 224–6formal conception and, 173, 175,
177, 178–83general theory of law and the state, 177
individualistic conception and, 134,138, 145, 149
on lack of consequences ofinternational personality,191–6
on normative theory of state, 183–91on opinio iuris, 265recognition conception and, 90, 91Vienna Circle, relationship to, 181
Ken Wiwa v. Royal Dutch PetroleumCompany (US District Court,Southern District of New York,2002), 166
Kennan, George F., 223, 226Kerr, Sir Michael, LJ, 234, 236, 240Keynes, John Maynard, viiiKissinger, Henry, 226Klabbers, Jan, 102Klöckner Industrie-Anlagen GmbH and
Others v. Republic of Cameroon(ICSID, 1985), 77, 206, 207
Knights of Malta, internationalpersonality of Order of, 115,118–19
Kolb, Robert, 265Koskenniemi, Martti, 15, 135Krabbe, Hugo, 126, 138, 145–6Kritik der reinen Vernunft (Kant,
1781), 185Kunz, Josef L., 178
Laband, Paul, 56, 58, 61, 94, 182LaGrand case (Germany v. United
States, ICJ, 2001), 11, 20, 173,197–204, 272, 278
Laski, Harold J., 134, 139Lasson, Adolf, 62Lasswell, Harold D., 208, 214Lateran Treaty (1929), 116Lausanne Peace Treaty (1923), 65, 67Lauterpacht, Herschon Anglo-American and
Continental approaches, 136Austrian liberalism of, 135–6,
140, 146individualistic conception and,
126, 127, 128, 133, 134–6, 140,146, 147
322 index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
Nuremberg trials, involvement in, 155recognition conception and, 90states-only conception and, 69
law-creation. See creation of law,international legal personality’scompetence regarding
Law of Guarantees (1871, Italy), 115Law of Nations, 43, 46law of persons. See international legal
personality; legal personalityLe Fur, Louis, 151League of Nations, 89, 108, 138, 139,
217, 224legal method in Germany and Italy
between World Wars, 88legal personalityin international law. See
international legal personalityin private municipal law, 7–8, 19
legal positivismformal conception’s purely positive
approach, 177, 181, 192–6individualistic conception rejecting,
128–9, 134, 138, 147–9, 151,152
neo-positivism or logical positivisminfluencing, 181, 192–6
PCIJ Article 38(3) and, 152recognition conception and, 84, 90,
94–6significance of theory of
international personality to, 41states-only conception and, 48, 50,
59–62, 63WW I and rejection of, 149
legal realism, American. See actorconception
Legality of the Threat or Use of NuclearWeapons (ICJ AdvisoryOpinion, 1996), 109, 262
Legality of Use of Force cases (ICJ,2004), 22, 110
Lena Goldfields v. Soviet Union (LenaGoldfields Arbitration, 1930), 76
liberalismAustrian or Victorian, 135–6, 140, 146German liberal-national revolutions
of 1845–9, 59, 60
legal fiction of state rooted inideology of illiberal democracy,Kelsen on, 189–90
Liberia and South West Africajudgment (ICJ, 1966), 255–6
liberty, individual, and statehood,relationship between, 245,254–7
LibyaCase Concerning the Continental
Shelf (Libya v. Malta, ICJ, 1985),260
Tel-Oren v. Libyan Arab Republic(US Court of Appeals, DCCircuit, 1984), 163–4, 165
Texaco/Calasiatic v. Libya (1977),76, 110, 119–25, 281
Liechtenstein and Nottebohm case(Liechtenstein v. Guatemala,ICJ, 1955), 67
Lithuania and Panevezys-SaldutiskisRailway case (Estonia v.Lithuania, PCIJ, 1939), 67
Llewellyn, Karl N., 222Locarno, Treaty of (1925), 225Lochner v. New York (US Supreme
Court, 1905), 218–21Locke, John, 142logical positivism (neo-positivism),
181, 192–6Loizidou v. Turkey (ECHR, 1996),
167–72London Agreement (1945), 155Lotus case (PCIJ, 1927), 42, 266
Madison, James, 216Malta and Case Concerning the
Continental Shelf (Libya v.Malta, ICJ, 1985), 260
Malta, Order of, internationalpersonality of, 115
Manchurian crisis (1931), 139, 217, 250Mavrommatis-formula (Mavrommatis
Palestine Concessions, Greece v.UK, PCIJ, 1924), 11, 42, 65–8,74, 204, 278
McCorquodale, Robert, 209McDougal, Myers S., 208, 214, 222
index 323
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
McNair, Arnold Duncan, 134, 135, 155medieval concepts of international law,
32–3, 35member states of international
organizations, concurrentliability of, 233–9
Merkl, Adolf, 178Metaphysical Club, 220Methoden- und Richtungsstreit, 88–9Mexico and Avena case on individual
treaty rights to consularassistance, 203
Military and Paramilitary Activities inand Against Nicaragua(Nicaragua v. United States,ICJ, 1986), 262, 267
Ministry of Finance v. Association ofItalian Knights of the Order ofMalta (Italy, Court ofCassation, 1978), 119
Mondev International Ltd. v. UnitedStates (Award, 2002), 204
Monroe Doctrine, 216Montevideo Convention (1933), 250,
253Morgenthau, Hans D., 223–7Morocco, Case Concerning Rights of
Nationals of the United States ofAmerica in (France v. UnitedStates, ICJ, 1952), 260
municipal lawexclusive regulation of private
individuals in late 18th and19th centuries, 39
in individualistic conception, 130legal personality in, 7–8, 19state contracts and, 26, 27
Mussolini, Benito, 87
NamibiaNamibia opinion (ICJ, 1971)
individual freedom andstatehood, relationshipbetween, 255, 257
on nature and powers of state,250–2
South West Africa judgment (ICJ,1966), 255–6, 257
Nanni and Others v. Pace and theSovereign Order of Malta (Italy,Court of Cassation, 1935), 119
Napoleon, and Order of Malta, 118Napoleonic Code Civil, 147Napoleonic Wars, 51national lawformal conception, identity of state
with domestic legal system in,190
in individualistic conception, 130monist approaches to, 90, 91–2recognition conception, dualist
approach of, 91–2states-only conception, dualist
approach of, 44, 46treatment of international treaties
by, 20NATO (North Atlantic Treaty
Organization), internationalpersonality of, 22, 110
natural lawformal approach rejecting, 177, 193,
195, 196in France and United Kingdom
versus Italy, 50in Germany and Italy between
World Wars, 88historical background, 33, 34, 38,
40–1in individualistic conception, 131–2,
142, 148, 151, 153neo-Kantianism and, 183recognition conception’s rejection
of, 92in states-only conception, 44, 50,
60–4neo-Kantianism, 182, 185–6neo-positivism (logical positivism),
181, 192–6NetherlandsDesignation of the Workers’ Delegate
for the Netherlands at the ThirdSession of the InternationalLabour Conference (PCIJAdvisory Opinion, 1922), 108
North Sea Continental Shelf cases(ICJ, 1969), 259–61
324 index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
NewHaven (policy-oriented) School, 215new states, recognition by existing
states, 81–2, 93NicaraguaContra forces, 164Military and Paramilitary Activities
in and Against Nicaragua(Nicaragua v. United States,ICJ, 1986), 262, 267
Nietzsche, Friedrich, 224Nijman, Janne Elisabeth, 18non liquet exclusion, 131, 153non-state actorsACTA jurisprudence on private
violations of constitutionalprinciples of jus cogenscharacter, 154, 162–7
defined, 23in framework combining formal and
individualistic conceptions,280–1
in late 18th and 19th centuries, 39in recognition conceptionlimited and exceptionalpersonality under, 82, 84, 93,99, 106
as objective internationalpersonalities, 105, 107
significance of different personalityconceptions to, 23–5
normative and actual, relationshipbetween, 245, 264–8, 269
normative view of state in formalconception, 177, 183–91
North Atlantic Treaty Organization(NATO), internationalpersonality of, 22, 110
North Sea Continental Shelf cases (ICJ,1969), 259–61, 267
Nottebohm case (Liechtenstein v.Guatemala, ICJ, 1955), 67
nullum crimen sine lege, 156Nuremberg Judgments, 128, 154–62,
273
objective reality of internationalpersons
actor conception in ITC cases, 233–9
recognition conception of non-stateactors, 105, 107
O’Connell, D. P., 173open systemformal conception as, 173, 177framework combining formal and
individualistic conceptions as,271–2, 276
international law regarded as, 283opinio iuris, role of, 265–8Oppenheim, Lassa, viiion Holy See as international
personality, 117recognition conception and, 84, 117on states-only conception, 42, 46, 48,
49, 52, 58, 59, 64Order of Malta, international
personality of, 115, 118–19
pacta sunt servanda, 45, 123, 131, 195Pakistan and SGS, 77Palestine. See IsraelPalestinian Liberation Organization
(PLO), 163–4Panevezys-Saldutiskis Railway case
(Estonia v. Lithuania, PCIJ,1939), 67
Papal States annexed by Italy, 115. Seealso Roman Catholic Church
Papua New Guinea and SandlineInternational case (InterimAward, 1998), 27, 76, 210,239–42, 281
Paraguay, 163PCIJ. See Permanent Court of
International JusticePeckham, Judge, 218Peirce, Charles Sanders, 220Permanent Court of International
Justice (PCIJ). See also specificcases, statements, and AdvisoryOpinions, by name
creation of, 89on general principles of
international law (Article 38(3)), 147, 196
on non liquet exclusion, 132, 153persistent objector, concept of, 260
index 325
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
personality, legal. See internationallegal personality
persons, law of. See international legalpersonality; legal personality
Peru and Asylum case (Colombia v.Peru, ICJ, 1950), 260
Philippinesrecognition of international status of
Holy See by 118Societe Generale de Surveillance
(SGS) v. Philippines (ICSID,2004), 204
philosophy of as-if (Vaihinger), 188piracy, as international law subject, 39PLO (Palestinian Liberation
Organization), 163–4PolandBeamtenabkommen (1921),
with Free City of Danzig, 20,69–72
Certain Questions relating to Settlersof German Origin in theTerritory ceded by Germany toPoland (Advisory Opinion,PCIJ, 1923), 73, 89
German-Polish Convention(1922), 73
Jurisdiction of the Courts of Danzig,PCIJ Advisory Opinion on, 12,42, 68–73
Questions Concerning theAcquisition of PolishNationality (PCIJ AdvisoryOpinion, 1923), 89, 108
Steiner and Gross v. Polish State(Upper Silesian ArbitralTribunal, 1928), 73
policy-oriented or New Haven School,215
Polish Minorities Treaty (1919), 73political nature of legal fiction of state,
Kelsen on, 189–90Politis, Nicolas, 126, 139, 151Pope. See Roman Catholic Churchpositivism, legal. See legal positivismPound, Roscoe, 222pragmatist philosophy and actor
conception, 213, 220–3
Presbyterian Church of Sudan v.Talisman Energy, Inc. (USDistrict Court, SouthernDistrict of New York, 2003),166, 167, 274, 280
presence and function of internationallegal personality ininternational legal argument,7–12
Principia Mathematica (Russell,1910–1913), 181
private individuals. See individuals ininternational law
private municipal law. See municipallaw
private parties, state contracts with. Seestate contracts
Prosecutor v. Akeyasu (ICTR, 1998), 161Prosecutor v. Furundzija (ICTY, 1998),
160, 161, 262, 273, 275Prosecutor v. Simic et al. (ICTY, 1999),
24, 111, 113–14, 272, 280Prosecutor v. Tadic (ICTY, 1995–98),
160, 273Prussian-Austrian War (1866), 51public lawDuguit’s conception of, 140–5formal conception and, 178, 179,
182, 186–9in Germany and Italy between
World Wars, 88–9, 178,179, 182
in individualistic conception, 130international law as form of, 47, 60, 62
Pufendorf, Samuel, 36, 38, 53
quasi-international law and statecontracts, 28
The Queen v. Van Bergen (AlbertaCourt of Appeal, 2000), 203
Questions Concerning the Acquisitionof Polish Nationality (PCIJAdvisory Opinion, 1923), 73,89, 108, 200
Ralli Brothers principle, 241Rama-Montaldo, Manuel, 102, 104Rawls, John, 14
326 index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
realism, American. See under actorconception
recognitionconstitutive versus declaratory
nature of, 248–53in framework combining formal and
individualistic conceptions,272, 277
in individualistic conception, 132in states-only conception, 43, 93
recognition conception, 80–125actual and normative, relationship
between, 264assumptions no longer supported by
current practice, 3, 243, 248,268–70
basic propositions of, 80–4binding nature of international law
under, 83compared to other conceptions,
245–8defined, 13, 80evaluation of. See evaluation of
conceptions of internationallegal personality
framework of states-only conception,maintaining, 84, 90–3
Holy See, international personalityof, 115–18
ICRC, international legal status of,110–14
implied powers doctrine, 103, 104individual freedom and statehood,
relationship between, 254individualistic conception rejecting,
128international organizations,
emergence of, 80, 94, 97–9law-creation, international legal
personality’s competenceregarding, 83, 84, 93
legal positivism and, 84, 90, 94–6legal practice, main manifestations
in, 99Malta, international personality of
Order of, 115, 118–19national and international law,
relationship between, 91–2
natural law, rejection of, 92nature of statehood in, 88, 91non-state entitieslimited and exceptionalpersonality of, 82, 84, 93,99, 106
as objective international persons,105, 107
origins in German and Italiancontext after WW I, 84–90
recognition, constitutive nature of,249
in Reparation for Injuries caseregarding United Nations, 80,99–110
sociological perspective of, 85, 93–9,104, 106
on sources of international law, 83,88, 92, 257
stateas fact, 248nature of statehood, theories of,88, 91
new states, recognition by existingstates, 81–2, 93
as normal, primary legal person,80, 83, 84
Texaco/Calasiatic v. Libya (1977),119–25
Red Cross, International Committee ofthe (ICRC), 24, 110–14, 280
Regina v. Bow Street MetropolitanStipendiary Magistrate, ex partePinochet Ugarte No. 3 (UKHouse of Lords, 1999), 161
Reichspublizistik, 52–4, 58, 60Reine Rechtslehre (Kelsen, 1934), 91, 179Reineccius v. Bank for International
Settlements (Permanent Courtof Arbitration, 2002), 210,228–32, 279
Reisman, W. Michael, 208, 214, 229Reparation for Injuries (ICJ Advisory
Opinion, 1949), 1, 9, 12, 22, 23,80, 99–110, 122, 123, 236, 253,276, 279
Republika Srpska, 165–7respublica christiana, 33, 35
index 327
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
Rhodes and Malta, internationalpersonality of Order of, 115,118–19
Rhodesia, recognition as state, 250,252, 253
Right to Information on ConsularAssistance (IACHR AdvisoryOpinion, 1999), 202
rightsconception of international
personality based on. Seeindividualistic conception
framework combining formal andindividualistic conceptions incontext of, 273–4, 276, 280
individual freedom and statehood,relationship between, 245, 254–7
LaGrand case on consular assistanceas human right, 201–2
Rights of Nationals of the United Statesof America in Morocco (Francev. United States, ICJ, 1952), 260
Roman Catholic ChurchHoly See, as international
personality, 115–18The Holy See v. Starbright Enterprises
Inc. (Philippines SupremeCourt, 1994), 118
Order of Knights of Malta,international personality of,115, 118–19
Papal States annexed by Italy, 115respublica christiana under Emperor
and Pope, 33, 35separate international personalities
of Holy See and Vatican City,116–18
Vatican City, recognized as state, 116Roman ius gentium, 32Romano, Santi, 85, 94, 96–7, 98, 151Rome Statute (1998), 161, 162Roosevelt, Franklin D., 155Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, 141, 142, 189, 190rule-sceptic view of international law as
authoritative decision-makingprocess, 211–12, 213, 217–23,258, 264
Russell, Bertrand, 181
St. John of Jerusalem (Malta),international personality ofOrder of, 115, 118–19
Salvioli, Gabriele, 151Sanchez-Espinoza v. Reagan (US Court
of Appeals, DC Circuit, 1985),164, 165
Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon (USSupreme Court, 2006), 203
Sandline International Inc. v. PapuaNew Guinea (Interim Award,1998), 27, 76, 210, 239–42, 281
Sapphire International Petroleums Ltd.v. National Iranian OilCompany (1963), 76
Scalia, Antonin, 164Scelle, Georges, 90, 91, 126, 127, 139,
151scholastic concepts of international
law, 32–3, 35Schönberg, Arnold, 180Schwarzenberger, Georg, 80, 85, 86, 90,
91, 93, 103, 107Seidl-Hohenveldern, Ignaz, 102, 122Sein and Sollen, 224–7Selbstbindungslehre (auto-limitation of
the state), 62separate personality of statein late 18th and 19th centuries, 38–40Vattel on, 35–8
Serbian Loans statement on statecontracts (PCIJ, 1929), 42,73–7, 84, 281
Sereni, Angelo Piero, 102Seyersted, Finn, 102, 209SGS (Societe Generale de Surveillance)
v. Pakistan (ICSID, 2004), 77SGS (Societe Generale de Surveillance) v.
Philippines (ICSID, 2004), 204significance of international legal
personality, 19–28Siotto-Pintor, Manfredi, 80Skinner, Quentin, 17Slaughter, Anne-Marie, 209slavery, US, 216social contract theory rejected in states-
only conception, 52, 53, 54, 55social institutionalism, 94, 96–7, 151
328 index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
Societe Generale de Surveillance (SGS)v. Pakistan (ICSID, 2004), 77
Societe Generale de Surveillance (SGS) v.Philippines (ICSID, 2004), 204
sociological perspectiveformal conception rejecting, 187,
190, 195of individualistic conception, 143,
144, 148, 151of recognition conception, 85, 93–9,
104, 106Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain et al. (US
Supreme Court, 2004), 167sources of international law. See also
natural lawactor conception of authoritative
decision-making process,211–12, 213, 217–23, 258, 264
before Vattel, 33in formal conception, 177, 258, 261,
263general versus particular, 245,
257–64, 269in individualistic conception, 131–2,
258, 261, 263in recognition conception, 83, 88,
92, 257in states-only conception, 64, 257
South AfricaBantustans (South African
homelands), 252, 253Namibia opinion (ICJ, 1971)
individual freedom and statehood,relationship between, 255, 257
on nature and powers of state,250–2
South West Africa judgment (ICJ,1966), 255–6, 257
Un souvenir de Solferino (Dunant,1862), 111
sovereignty, state, interwar ideas about,140–3
Soviet UnionCold War, 217, 223, 226Lena Goldfields v. Soviet Union (Lena
Goldfields Arbitration, 1930), 76Status of Eastern Carelia (PCIJ
Advisory Opinion, 1923), 108
St. John of Jerusalem (Malta),international personality ofOrder of, 115, 118–19
Stalin, Josef, 155Stammler, Rudolph, 182stateauto-limitation of
(Selbstbindungslehre), 62comparison of nature and powers in
different conceptions, 245,248–54
as fact versus legal status, 248–54, 268in formal conception. See under
formal conceptionin framework combining formal and
individualistic conceptions,274–5
general versus particular sources ofinternational law and view of,245, 257–64
individual freedom and statehood,relationship between, 245,254–7, 268
in individualistic conception. Seeunder individualisticconception
Kelsen’s normative theory of, 177,183–91
in recognition conception. See underrecognition conception
separate personality ofin late 18th and 19th centuries,38–40
Vattel on, 35–8sovereignty, interwar ideas about,
140–3two-sided theory of (Zwei-Seiten-
Theorie), 57, 94, 182, 186, 189,252
state contractsactor conception and, 27, 239–42Amco v. Indonesia, formal
conception in, 197choice of law for, 120–2in framework combining formal and
individualistic conceptions, 281Sandline v. Papua New Guinea on,
239–42
index 329
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
state contracts (cont.)Serbian Loans statement on, 42,
73–7, 84, 281significance of different conceptions
of international law for, 25–8Suez Canal arbitration of 1864, 39Texaco/Calasiatic v. Libya, 76, 110,
119–25states-only conception, 42–79actual and normative, relationship
between, 264assumptions no longer supported by
current practice, 3, 243, 248,268–70
basic propositions of, 43–7binding nature of international law
in, 45–6, 62–3common will of community of states,
international law as, 43–5, 47,59–64
compared to other conceptions,245–8
creation of law, international legalpersonality’s competenceregarding, 9, 59, 64
defined, 13, 42evaluation of. See evaluation of
conceptions of internationallegal personality
fact, state as, 248German 19th-century socio-political
context and, 47–54. See alsoGermany
historical fact absorbing individuals,state regarded as, 52–9
individual freedom and statehood,relationship between, 254
individualistic conception rejecting,128
individuals in, 21, 44, 46, 52–9international organizations,
international personality of, 23international personality and states,
synonymity of, 43, 46, 47Italy, unification of, 49–50Jurisdiction of the Courts of Danzig
Opinion and, 42, 68–73legal positivism and, 48, 50, 59–62, 63
legal practice, main manifestationsin, 64
Lotus dictum and, 42Mavrommatis-formula and, 42, 65–8national law contrasted with
international law in, 44, 46natural law rejected by, 44, 50, 60–4non-state actors in, 24origins of, 42, 47public law, international law as form
of, 47, 60, 62recognitionconstitutive nature of, 249role of, 43, 93
recognition conception maintainingbasic framework of, 84, 90–3
Serbian Loans statement on statecontracts and, 42, 73–7
social contract theory, rejection of,52, 53, 54, 55
social relations regulated in, 46sources of international law in,
64, 257untenability of, 2Van Gend en Loos decision of ECJ
and, 42, 77–9Vattel on separate personality of
state, 35–8Status of Eastern Carelia (PCIJ
Advisory Opinion, 1923), 108Steiner and Gross v. Polish State (Upper
Silesian Arbitral Tribunal,1928), 73
Stresemann, Gustav, 224Strupp, Karl, 80, 85, 86, 90, 91, 92, 93,
107Suarez, Francisco, 33–5subjects of international law. See
international legal personalitysubstantive due process, 215, 218–19Suez Canal arbitration (1864), 39Supreme Court, US, constitutional
review powers of, 215SwitzerlandBIS and, 229, 230Civil Code, 148ICRC as private association under
Swiss law, 110, 111, 112, 113
330 index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
Talmon, Stefan, 252Tel-Oren v. Libyan Arab Republic (US
Court of Appeals, DC Circuit,1984), 163–4, 165
Texaco/Calasiatic v. Libya (ICJ, 1977),76, 110, 119–25, 281
Third Republic, France, 136Tocqueville, Alexis de, 215Tokyo, International Military Tribunal
(IMT) for the Far East at, 155, 160torture, 163Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
(Wittgenstein, 1921), 181Trading Companies, historical
international personality of, 34Transkei, recognition as state, 250treatiesBITs. See bilateral investment
treatiesgeneral versus particular sources of
international law, 245, 257–64individuals, application to, 77–9,
197–204, 277–8LaGrand case, on individual treaty
rights under formal conception,173, 197–204
normative force in formalconception, 195–6
Treatise of Human Nature (Hume,1739–40), 184
Triepel, Heinrich, 42, 45, 48, 52, 58, 59,63, 64, 84, 93
Truman Doctrine, 217Truman, Harry, 155Turkish Republic of Northern CyprusLoizidou case involving, 167–72recognition of, 250, 252, 253
The Twenty Years’Crisis (Carr, 1939), 226two-sided theory of the state
(Zwei-Seiten-Theorie), 57, 94,182, 186, 189, 252
types or conceptions of internationallegal personality, 2, 13–18,29. See also actor conception;formal conception;individualistic conception;recognition conception;states-only conception
umbrella clauses in BITs, 27unified scientific method, formal
conception influenced by, 181United Kingdomacademic treatment of international
law in, 40Anglo-American and Continental
approaches, Lauterpacht on,136
Anglo-Iranian Oil Co. case (UnitedKingdom v. Iran, ICJ, 1952), 76
Corfu Channel case (UnitedKingdom v. Albania, ICJ, 1949),262
Ireland v. United Kingdom (ECHR,1976), 169
ITC cases (UK Courts, 1987–1989,and ECJ, 1990), 22, 110, 210,233–9, 279
Lauterpacht and individualisticconception in, 134, 136
Mavrommatis-formula, 65–8natural law, influence of, 50Oppenheim and states-only
conception in, 48, 49Palestine, British mandate over, 65post-WW II collapse of empire,
217Regina v. Bow Street Metropolitan
Stipendiary Magistrate,ex parte Pinochet UgarteNo. 3 (UK House of Lords,1999), 161
Schwarzenberger and recognitionconception in, 86
United NationsCharter’s failure to address
international personality of,101, 103, 105
ICRC and, 112on individual responsibility under
international criminal law, 159,162
Order of Malta and, 119Reparation for Injuries Advisory
Opinion (ICJ), recognized asinternational personality in, 1,9, 12, 22, 80, 99–110
index 331
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
United Statesactor conception and American
realism. See under actorconception
Amco v. Indonesia (ICSID, 1984–1990), on state contracts, 204–7
Anglo-American and Continentalapproaches, Lauterpacht on,136
ATCA jurisprudence, 154Avena case (Mexico v. United States,
ICJ, 2004), 11, 20, 173, 203, 278BIS and, 229Case Concerning Rights of Nationals
of the United States of Americain Morocco (France v. UnitedStates, ICJ, 1952), 260
Civil War, 216, 218Cold War, 217, 223, 226Filartiga v. Pena-Arala (US Court of
Appeals 2nd Circuit, 1980), 163Iwonawa v. Ford Motor Company
(US District Court, District ofNew Jersey, 1999), 166
Kadic v. Karadzic I (US DistrictCourt, Southern District of NewYork, 1994), 165
Kadic v. Karadzic II (US Court ofAppeals, 2nd Circuit 1995), 24,163, 165–7, 273, 280
Ken Wiwa v. Royal Dutch PetroleumCompany (US District Court,Southern District of New York,2002), 166
LaGrand case (Germany v. UnitedStates, ICJ, 2001), on individualtreaty rights to consularassistance, 197
Lochner v. New York (US SupremeCourt, 1905), 218–21
Military and Paramilitary Activitiesin and Against Nicaragua(Nicaragua v. United States,ICJ, 1986), 262, 267
Mondev International Ltd. v. UnitedStates (Award, 2002), 204
Presbyterian Church of Sudan v.Talisman Energy, Inc. (US
District Court, SouthernDistrict of New York, 2003),166, 167, 274, 280
Sanchez-Espinoza v. Reagan (USCourt of Appeals, DC Circuit,1985), 164, 165
Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon (USSupreme Court, 2006), 203
Smith, United States v. (US SupremeCourt, 1820), 39
Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain et al. (USSupreme Court, 2004), 167
substantive due process andFourteenth Amendment, 215,218–19
Supreme Court, constitutionalreview powers of, 215
Tel-Oren v. Libyan Arab Republic(US Court of Appeals, DCCircuit, 1984), 163–4, 165
Vaihinger, Hans, 188, 189–90Van Gend en Loos v. Netherlands
Inland Revenue Administration(ECJ, 1963), 21, 42, 77–9, 170,278
Vatican City. See also Roman CatholicChurch
recognized as state, 116as separate international personality
from Holy See, 116–18Vattel, Emer de, 31, 35–8, 66VCCR (Vienna Convention on
Consular Relations, 1963), 20,197–203
VCLT (Vienna Convention on the Lawof Treaties, 1969), 261, 272
Venda, recognition as state, 250Verdross, Alfredformal conception and, 178individualistic conception and, 127,
134, 147, 149–50, 151, 153recognition conception and, 90, 96
Vereinbarung (law-makingagreement), state agreementsas, 45, 63, 93
Versailles, Treaty of (1919), 68, 87,89, 224
332 index
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information
Victorian (Austrian) liberalism, 135–6,140, 146
Vienna Circle, 180, 192Vienna, Congress of (1815), 51Vienna Convention on Consular
Relations (VCCR, 1963), 20,197–203
Vienna Convention on the Law ofTreaties (VCLT, 1969), 261, 272
Vienna, Final Act of Congress of(1815), 51
Vienna school of law, 149, 178Vitoria, Francisco de, 33–5, 38Völkerrecht und Landesrecht (Triepel,
1899), 48volonte generale, Rousseau’s concept of,
141, 142, 189, 190
Washington Convention on theSettlement of InvestmentDisputes between States andNationals of Other States(1966), 10
Weber, Max, 51Weimar Republic, 87Westphalia, Peace Treaties of (1648),
51Wilson, Woodrow, 216, 223Wittgenstein, Ludwig, 181Wolff, Christian, 36, 37World War IGermany, post-war resentment of,
137–9, 217positivism, rejection of, 149
Versailles, Treaty of (1919), 68, 87,89, 224
World War IIindividualistic conception and
horrors of, 139Nuremberg Judgments and
individualistic conception, 128,154–62
US intervention in, 216
Yerodia case (Democratic Republic ofthe Congo v. Belgium, ICJ,2002), 161
Young Plan, 89, 228–32Yugoslavia, formerBosnia and Herzegovina, 165–7Bosnian Genocide case (Bosnia and
Herzegovina v. Serbia andMontenegro, ICJ, 2007), 161,162, 274
Bosnian Genocide case (Bosnia andHerzegovina v. Yugoslavia, ICJ,1993), 261
ICTY. See International CriminalTribunal for the FormerYugoslavia
Serbian Loans statement on statecontracts (PCIJ, 1929), 42,73–7, 84, 281
Zionist movement, 135Zwei-Seiten-Theorie (two-sided theory
of the state), 57, 94, 182, 186,189, 252
index 333
www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Cambridge University Press978-0-521-76845-0 - Legal Personality in International LawRoland PortmannIndexMore information