Human Rights and the United Kingdom Supreme Court

After setting the scene by explaining the constraints which are placed on the Justices of the UK Supreme Court, this book considers how human rights are conceptualized by the Court in general and how in particular the procedural questions thrown up by the Human Rights Act have been dealt with so far. It then examines on a right-by-right basis the Justices' position on all the European Convention rights and some additional international human rights standards incorporated into UK law.

A steady ship: A quiet year for the United Kingdom Supreme Court

This piece reviews the decisions issued by the UK's Supreme Court during 2014, comparing the output with the previous year's and highlighting some particularly important cases.

The European Convention on Human Rights and the United Kingdom's Supreme Court

This article reviews the attitudes displayed by the UK's Supreme Court towards claims based on human rights law.

So mechanical or routine: The not original in Feist

The United States Supreme Court case of 1991, Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Service Co., continues to be highly significant for property in data and databases, but remains poorly understood. The approach taken in this article contrasts with previous studies. It focuses upon the “not original” rather than the original. The delineation of the absence of a modicum of creativity in selection, coordination, and arrangement of data as a component of the not original forms a pivotal point in the Supreme Court decision. The author also aims at elucidation rather than critique, using close textual exegesis of the Supreme Court decision. The results of the exegesis are translated into a more formal logical form to enhance clarity and rigor.


The insufficiently creative is initially characterized as “so mechanical or routine.” Mechanical and routine are understood in their ordinary discourse senses, as a conjunction or as connected by AND, and as the central clause. Subsequent clauses amplify the senses of mechanical and routine without disturbing their conjunction.


The delineation of the absence of a modicum of creativity can be correlated with classic conceptions of computability. The insufficiently creative can then be understood as a routine selection, coordination, or arrangement produced by an automatic mechanical procedure or algorithm. An understanding of a modicum of creativity and of copyright law is also indicated.


The value of the exegesis and interpretation is identified as its final simplicity, clarity, comprehensiveness, and potential practical utility.

Domestic Violence and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights: Jessica Lenahan (Gonzales) v United States

On 21 July 2011 the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights issued its much awaited decision in the case of Jessica Lenahan (Gonzales) v United States. In a landmark decision the Commission found the United States of America to be in violation of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man 1948 due to the failure of the state to protect a victim of domestic violence and her children. This paper analyses the Lenahan decision and its significance for the United States. In particular, the substantial influence of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights on the Commission’s reasoning is examined.

The United States and trade disputes in the World Trade Organization: Hegemony constrained or confirmed?

Does the World Trade Organization function to reinforce American dominance (or hegemony) of the world economy? We examine this question via an analysis of trade disputes involving the United States. This allows us to assess whether the US does better than other countries in this judicialised forum: and in so doing enhance the competitive prospects of their firms. The results are equivocal. The United States does best in the early phases of a dispute, where political power is important. It does less well as the process develops.

A Firm Perspective of Anti-dumping and Countervailing Duty Cases in the United States

The role played by firms in the prosecution of anti-dumping and countervailing duty cases in the United States is understudied. This article provides greater understanding of the challenges faced by firms during the process of prosecuting anti-dumping and countervailing duty cases in the United States. This is achieved by applying a theoretical model of corporate political activity to data collected through interviews with 24 trade attorneys in Washington, D.C., practising in the area of antidumping and countervailing duty law. Anti-dumping and countervailing duty cases are found to require significant resource commitments from firms in the participating industries, as well as requiring individual firms to make a number of strategic decisions. The value of an affirmative decision and imposition of duties to the domestic and foreign industry is found to be more nuanced than previous studies have suggested. Non-duty effects of AD and CVD cases are also confirmed. Finally a clearer understanding of the role of individual firms in anti-dumping and countervailing duty cases is shown to have the potential to improve how industry influence is taken account of in future research.