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.

An increasing number of challenges against the activities and decisions of international organisations are brought before national courts. This book offers an overview of how different courts have dealt with these cases and an analysis of the legal framework which applies to them, identifying common ground across jurisdictions.

International organizations are increasingly operating across borders and engaging in legal transactions in virtually all jurisdictions. This makes, familiarity with the applicable law and practice imperative for both international organizations and those who engage in legal relations with them. Furthermore, the issue of whether, how, and to what extent domestic courts take into account decisions of foreign and international courts and tribunals in their own decision-making has become increasingly important in recent years. This book provides a comprehensive empirical study of this transnational judicial dialogue, focusing on the law and practice of domestic jurisdictions concerning the legal personality, privileges, and immunities of international organizations. It presents a selection of detailed country-by-country studies, examining the manner of judicial dialogue across domestic jurisdictions, and between national and international courts. The approach taken in this book intersects with three highly topical areas of international legal scholarship: the rapidly evolving law of international institutions; the burgeoning research into the role of domestic courts in the international legal system; and the recent rise of empirically-oriented legal scholarship. Utilizing OUP's International Law in Domestic Courts database, the book presents analysis of little-known cases which have real international significance, illustrating the impact and extent of transnational judicial dialogue in the international legal system. The book provides important perspectives on the evolution and status of the law of immunity of international organizations, and contributes to the understanding of relationships between national courts, and between national and international courts.

In December 2011, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the International Law Commission's articles on the responsibility of international organizations, bringing to conclusion not only nearly ten years of reflection by the Commission, governments and organizations on this specific topic, but also decades of study of the wider subject of international responsibility, which had initially focused on State responsibility. Parallel to this reflection by the Commission, diplomats and public officials, the body of international case-law and literature on the many facets of the topic has steadily been growing. Responsibility of International Organizations: Essays in Memory of Sir Ian Brownlie contributes to the body of international literature by collecting a broad spectrum of different and sometimes differing perspectives from well-known experts in the field, ranging from the bench to the Commission, academia, and the world of in-house counsel. The book is also a memorial to the renowned Sir Ian Brownlie, himself a former Chairman of the International Law Commission who, as a leading scholar and practitioner, greatly contributed to the reflection on international responsibility, including the responsibility of international organizations. Edited by Maurizio Ragazzi, a former pupil of Sir Ian, the book is an ideal companion to International Responsibility Today, a collection of essays on international responsibility which the same editor presented in 2005 in memory of Oscar Schachter, and to which Sir Ian Brownlie had contributed. The essays collected in Responsibility of International Organizations: Essays in Memory of Sir Ian Brownlie, conveniently grouped by the editor under broad areas for the reader's benefit, will be relevant not only to all those interested in this specific subject but also, more generally, to all those engaged in the field of international law and the law of international organizations.

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).

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.

This book explores the way domestic courts contribute to the maintenance of theinternational of law by providing judicial control over the exercises of public powers that may conflict with international law. The main focus of the book will be on judicial control of exercise of public powers by states. Key cases that will be reviewed in this book, and that will provide empirical material for the main propositions, include Hamdan, in which the US Supreme Court reviewed detention by the United States of suspected terrorists against the 1949 Geneva Conventions; Adalah, in which the Supreme Court of Israel held that the use of local residents by Israeli soldiers in arresting a wanted terrorist is unlawful under international law, and the Narmada case, in which the Indian Supreme Court reviewed the legality of displacement of people in connection with the building of a dam in the river Narmada under the ILO Indigenous and Tribal Populations Convention 1957 (nr 107). This book explores what it is that international law requires, expects, or aspires that domestic courts do. Against this backdrop it maps patterns of domestic practice in the actual or possible application of international law and determines what such patterns mean for the protection of the international rule of law.