Denial of justice is one of the oldest bases of liability in international law and the modern understanding of denial of justice is examined by Paulsson in this book, which was originally published in 2005. The possibilities for prosecuting the offence of denial of justice have evolved in fundamental ways and it is now settled law that States cannot disavow international responsibility by arguing that their courts are independent of the government. Even more importantly, the doors of international tribunals have swung wide open to admit claimants other than states: non-governmental organisations, corporations and individuals, and Paulsson examines several recent cases of great importance in his book.

A study of state responsibility for acts committed in the course of different stages of adjudicatory process.

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

"In recent years, the concept of fair and equitable treatment has assumed prominence in investment relations between States. While the earliest proposals that made reference to this standard of treatment for investment are contained in various multilateral efforts in the period immediately following World War II, the bulk of the State practice incorporating the standard is to be found in bilateral investment treaties which have become a central feature in international investment relations. In essence, the fair and equitable standard provides a yardstick by which relations between foreign direct investors and Governments of capital-importing countries may be assessed. It also acts as a signal from capital-importing countries, for it indicates, at the very least, a State's willingness to accommodate foreign capital on terms that take into account the interests of the investor in fairness and equity."--Provided by publisher.

Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice defines "international law" to include not only "custom" and "convention" between States but also "the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations" within their municipal legal systems. In 1953, Bin Cheng wrote his seminal book on general principles, identifying core legal principles common to various domestic legal systems across the globe. This monograph summarizes and analyzes the general principles of law and norms of international due process, with a particular focus on developments since Cheng's writing. The aim is to collect and distill these principles and norms in a single volume as a practical resource for international law jurists, advocates, and scholars. The information contained in this book holds considerable importance given the growth of inter-state intercourse resulting in the increased use of general principles over the past 60 years. General principles can serve as rules of decision, whether in interpreting a treaty or contract, determining causation, or ascertaining unjust enrichment. They also include a core set of procedural requirements that should be followed in any adjudicative system, such as the right to impartiality and the prohibition on fraud. Although the general principles are, by definition, basic and even rudimentary, they hold vital importance for the rule of law in international relations. They are meant not to define a rule of law, but rather the rule of law.

This book is a codification of the principles and rules relating to the prosecution of investment claims.

The International Court of Justice at The Hague is the principal judicial organ of the UN, and the successor of the Permanent Court of International Justice (1923–1946), which was the first real permanent court of justice at the international level. This 2005 book analyses the groundbreaking contribution of the Permanent Court to international law, both in terms of judicial technique and the development of legal principle. The book draws on archival material left by judges and other persons involved in the work of the Permanent Court, giving fascinating insights into many of its most important decisions and the individuals who made them (Huber, Anzilotti, Moore, Hammerskjöld and others). At the same time it examines international legal argument in the Permanent Court, basing its approach on a developed model of international legal argument that stresses the intimate relationships between international and national lawyers and between international and national law.