Multiplicity of International Courts and Tribunals

This work comprehensively explores the implications of multiplicty of international judicial bodies on the coherent application of public international law. It carried out an in-depth analysis of the underlying reasons for the multiplicity, a thorough discussion of the benefits and the challenges presented by this development, its theoretical dimensions and solutions suggested to mitigate the challenges. The work locates the root causes of these challenges in the normative and institutional expansions of international law without a corresponding coordination of the activities of the ¿proliferating¿ judicial bodies. The challanges are systemic in nature. Clearly, because of their systemic nature, the impacts of these challenges are not limited to the specific courts, cases and parties implicated, but have a ripple effect that reverberates throughout the system. Therefore, the mitigation of the impacts of these challenges is of a paramount importance for the credibility, predictability, legitimacy and overall integrity of the international legal system and the eventual augmentation of the ¿compliance pull¿ garnered as a result.

The problematic relationship between customary international law and the domestic courts

The relationship between international law and domestic law has long been problematic. This article considers in particular the enforcement of customary international law through an analysis of judicial practice in England and Australia. The examination of the jurisprudence suggests that domestic judges often feel uncomfortable when asked to apply international law in the domestic courts and struggle to somehow justify its use. This has led to an inconsistency in judicial practice in the application of international law in jurisdictions such as Australia. However, ultimately the monist theory that recognizes that customary international law automatically flows into the domestic law appears to be reflected in an emerging trend in judicial practice in the common law judicial systems under consideration. However, the article suggests that the English courts now see international crimes as an exception to that theory and require domestic legislative transformation. Ultimately the article concludes that the municipal courts provide an important forum for the enforceability of customary international law, including human rights norms.

The moral rights of authors and performers: an international and comparative analysis

This book is a comprehensive guide to the development and utilization of authorial moral rights across the key jurisdictions of the English-speaking world and in France and Germany. In recent years, the copyright statutes of the common law countries have been expanded by the introduction of provisions dealing with purely authorial rights - moral rights.
The Moral Rights of Authors and Performers discusses the historical development of the rights in Europe, with particular reference to France and Germany, and shows the growth of moral rights theory and legislative coverage up to the late 1930s. During the 1920s the moral rights of authors became the subject of international protection, particularly through the operation of the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works. The book explores the adoption of moral rights into this and other international instruments, explaining the functions that moral rights were intended to perform.
The author gives detailed accounts of the operation of moral rights in France and Germany today, addressing both statutory interpretation and doctrinal issues. The provision of case studies gives an impression of the rich jurisprudence associated with the rights in these countries.
The book also contains a detailed discussion of the versions of moral rights that have become entrenched in Canada, the UK, the US and Australia, with each country considered independently. It deals separately with the introduction of the rights into each country and their operation and interpretation by courts and commentators. Material on common law analogues to the rights is provided, which indicates alternative actions that practitioners might take. Problems of cross-jurisdictional legal proceedings (especially arising from technological transfer of information) are also addressed, with moral rights protection elsewhere in the world summarized in tabular form.

Judicial and Legislative Considerations in the Taxation of Compensation Receipts: An International Comparison

In 1995 the Federal Commissioner of Taxation released Taxation Ruling TR 95/35 - an attempt to comprehensively address the appropriate capital gains tax treatment of a receipt of compensation awarded either by the courts or via a settlement - still a lack of consensus regarding the appropriate treatment of such awards - a private binding ruling presently the only way a taxpayer can determine their liability with any certainty - the Australian position compared to that of the United Kingdom and Canada.

International sentencing law: in search of a justification and coherent framework

An international sentencing jurisprudence is emerging from the decisions by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY or the Yugoslav tribunal) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR or the Rwanda tribunal) (collectively, 'the tribunals'). This article examines international sentencing law and practice and discusses the justification for the practice. International sentencing law has several objectives. The main goals are reconciliation, deterrence, retribution and rehabilitation. The sentencing inquiry is marked by a high degree of discretion and has resulted in sentencers developing a large amount of aggravating and mitigating considerations, such as being in a position of authority, remorse and good character. It is argued that the current international sentencing approach is flawed - fundamentally so. Most of the stated goals of international sentencing in the form of reconciliation, retribution and rehabilitation are either highly speculative or misguided. The only justification for the practice is general deterrence. This is, however, significantly undermined by the selective and infrequent enforcement of crimes within the jurisdiction of such tribunals. The stated aggravated and mitigating considerations are not valid given that they are not justified by reference to the stated aims of sentencing and only serve to undermine the search for a penalty which is commensurate the serious of the offence. This article suggests a coherent framework for international sentencing policy and practice.

Cross-border insolvency law and multinational enterprise groups: judicial Innovation as an international solution

The Article argues that courts confronting the effects of multinational enterprise insolvency must undertake a pragmatic incursion into the separate entity doctrine. This argument is premised on gaps in the current Model Law which confers significant discretion on the courts. Our research shows that courts have fashioned innovative solutions to fill the gaps and thatgreater recognition of the legitimacy of these judicial incursions into the separate entity doctrine would facilitate the reduction of transaction costs in the case of multinational group insolvencies. We identify criteriawhereby a court would be able to determine that the inherentseparateness of the corporate structure should be disregarded andthe group regarded as one.