In Article 31(3)(c) VCLT and the Principle of Systemic Integration: Normative Shadows in Plato’s Cave the author tackles a provision on treaty interpretation that has risen in prominence, Article 31(3)(c) VCLT. This article, which enshrines the principle of systemic integration, and its exact scope has become and continues to be a hotly debated subject in academic and judicial circles. Through an examination of both its written and unwritten elements, the author argues that the ‘proximity criterion’ is the optimal way of understanding and utilizing this provision, that conflict resolution principles may be of use within Article 31(3)(c) and finally, that the principle of systemic integration is indispensable not only for interpreting treaty provisions but customary international law as well.

This dissertation analyzes whether or not the principle of systemic integration - as expounded in Article 31(3)(c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties - contributes to attainment of a coherent international legal system. For this purpose, the book considers three general ideas: the "unity" of the international legal system and fragmentation; the general rule on treaty interpretation and the principle of systemic integration; and the role of systemic integration in the achievement of coherence. Each one involves specific issues and considerations which ultimately assist in addressing the main question as to the usefulness of the principle in the curtailment of fragmentation in the international legal system. Dissertation. (Series: Cologne Studies in International and European Law / Kolner Schriften zum internationalen und europaischen Recht - Vol. 24)

International law has greatly expanded in reach and density over the past few decades and its fragmented and decentralized nature is causing anxiety among those who need to resolve legal dilemmas in a system that lacks vertical hierarchy. Although the principle of systemic integration is embodied in Article 31(3)(c) of the Vienna Convention 1969, its operation and significance has not been fully assessed. The Principle of Systemic Integration in International Law fills this research gap by analysing the manner in which the principle has been applied in the judicial decisions of international courts and tribunals, together with the practice of states and international organizations in the framing of international instruments and their application. Building upon the framework he first pioneered in 2005 and the culmination of two decades of academic research and practical experience in international law, the author Campbell McLachlan KC closely examines legislative texts and cases to reflect on the principle's theoretical foundations and actual application in practice. The book argues that the principle of systemic integration contributes to an orderly framework within which conflicts between institutions and between legal norms may be addressed. It explores how disparate parts of international law are integrated in the development of bilateral and multilateral treaties and, finally, analyses the operation of the principle in international courts and tribunals. The reasoning and larger questions presented by the book will bring fresh insights to researchers and practitioners undertaking any international law project.

A theoretical analysis of the structure of expropriation in investment law, investigating the foundations for contemporary scholarship and practice.

Jan Klabbers examines how membership of the European Union affect treaties concluded between the member and non-member states.

If a treaty from the 1850s regulating 'commerce' or forbidding 'degrading treatment of persons' is to be interpreted 150 years later, does 'commerce' or 'degrading treatment of persons' have the same meaning at the time of interpretation as they had when the treaty was agreed? The evolutionary interpretation of treaties has proven one of the most controversial topics in the practice of international law. Indeed, it has been seen as going against the very grain of the law of treaties, and has been argued to be contrary to the intention of the parties, breaching the principle of consent. This book asks what the place of evolutionary interpretation is within the understanding of treaties, at a time when many important international legal instruments are over 50 years old. It sets out to place the evolutionary interpretation of treaties on a firm footing within the general rule of interpretation, as codified in Article 31 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. The book demonstrates that the evolutionary interpretation of treaties - in common with all other types of interpretation such as good faith, the text of the treaty, context, object and purpose - is in fact a based upon an objective understanding of the intention of the parties. In order to marry intention and evolution in this way, the book argues that, on the one hand, evolutionary interpretation is the product of the correct application of Article 31 and, on the other, that Article 31 is geared towards the establishment of the intention of the parties. The evolutionary interpretation of treaties is therefore shown to represent an intended evolution.

In Consensus-Based Interpretation of Regional Human Rights Treaties Francisco Pascual-Vives examines the central role played by the notion of consensus in the case law of the European and Inter-American Courts of Human Rights. As many other international courts and tribunals do, both regional human rights courts resort to this concept while undertaking an evolutive interpretation of the Rome Convention and the Pact of San José, respectively. The role exerted by the notion of consensus in this framework can be used not only to understand the evolving character of the rights and freedoms recognized by these international treaties, but also to reaffirm the international nature of these regional human rights courts.