This book proposes an approach that guarantees access to justice for victims of international institutional conduct without compromising institutional independence.

Recent examples such as the cholera outbreak in Haiti demonstrate that individual victims of human rights violations by international organizations are frequently left in the cold. Following an examination of the human rights obligations of international organizations, this book scrutinizes their dispute settlement mechanisms as well as the conflict between their immunities and the right of access to justice before national jurisdictions. It concludes with normative proposals addressed both to international organizations and to national judges confronted with such cases.

The Role of International Administrative Law at International Organizations, edited by Peter Quayle, is centred on the law of employment relations at international organizations, and divided into four parts. It examines the interplay between international administrative law and the jurisdictional immunities of international organizations. It explores the principles and practice of resolving employment related disputes at intergovernmental institutions. It considers the dynamic development of international administrative tribunals. It examines international administrative law as the basis for the effectiveness and integrity of international organizations. Together academics, jurists and practitioners portray the employment law that governs the international civil service and the resulting accountability of the United Nations, UN Specialized Agencies, and international financial institutions, like the World Bank and IMF.

The first casebook of its kind, Judicial Decisions on the Law of International Organizations contains relevant excerpts of leading court opinions and decisions on the law of international organizations (international institutional law) and critical commentaries written by leading experts in the field.

Immunity rules are part and parcel of the law of international organizations. It has long been accepted that international organizations and their staff need to enjoy immunity from the jurisdiction of national courts. However, it is the application of these rules in practice that increasingly causes controversy. Claims against international organizations are brought before national courts by those who allegedly suffer from their activities. These can be both natural and legal persons such as companies. National courts, in particular lower courts, have often been less willing to recognize the immunity of the organization concerned than the organization’s founding fathers. Likewise, public opinion and legal writings frequently criticize international organizations for invoking their immunity and for the lack of adequate means of redress for claimants. It is against this background that an international conference was organized at Leiden University in June 2013. A number of highly qualified academics and practitioners gave presentations and prepared written contributions that are collected in this book. This book is published to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the International Organizations Law Review, in which these contributions have also been published (Vol. 10, issue 2, 2014).

A radical, empirical investigation of how national courts 'react' to disputes involving international organizations. Through comprehensive analysis of the attitudes and techniques of national courts and underlying political motives, Professor Reinisch first describes various legal approaches that result in adjudication or non-adjudication of disputes concerning international organizations. Secondly he discusses policy issues pro and contra the adjudication of such disputes. His study then scrutinizes the rationale for immunizing international organizations from domestic litigations, especially the 'functional' need for immunity, and substantially debates the implications of a human rights-based right of access to court on immunizing international organizations against national jurisdictions. Finally he identifies contemporary trends, seeking to ascertain whether a more flexible principle exempting certain types of disputes from domestic adjudication might substitute for the traditional immunity concept, which would simultaneously guarantee the functioning and independence of international organizations without impairing private parties' access to a fair dispute settlement procedure.

Offering a new interdisciplinary approach to global justice and integrating the insights of international relations and contemporary ethics, this book asks whether the core norms of international law are just by appraising them according to a standard of global justice grounded in the advancement of peace and protection of human rights.