DOCSLIB.ORG

Winter 2004.Book

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

NEW YORK INTERNATIONAL Winter 2004 Vol. 17, No. 1 Articles Non-Compliance with the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and Its Effect on Reciprocity for United States Citizens Abroad Heather M. Heath ................................................................................................1 Alvarez-Machain v. United States: How Should the Ninth Circuit Determine Which Torts Are Actionable Under the Alien Tort Claims Act? Luciana Reali .....................................................................................................51 Enforcing International Labor Standards Through the Use of the Alien Tort Claims Act and Traditional Corporate Law Jonathan Fielding ..............................................................................................77 Recent Decisions Usinor Industeel v. Leeco Steel Products, Inc.. ...............................................103 The Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) does not apply to third persons who are not parties to a contract, so a dispute arising between a buyer, a seller and a third party with a security inter- est is governed by the local law of the state that has the most significant contacts to the contested property. CIBC Mellon Trust Co. v. Mora Hotel Corp. N.V............................................111 Enforcement of an English money judgment was upheld, where defendants were Netherlands corporations authorized to do business in New York. Winter Storm Shipping, Ltd. v. TPI ..................................................................119 The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld the use of a maritime attachment to inter- cept an electronic funds transfer in the hands of an intermediary bank, holding that electronic funds transfers are “property” to the extent that they may be the subject of a maritime attachment, and that the Uniform Commercial Code § 4-A-503, which forbids such interceptions, is preempted by federal admiralty law. Dattner v. ConAgra Foods, Inc........................................................................127 The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed Israeli plaintiff’s tort claim, stemming from activities which occurred in France, based on the doctrine of forum non conveniens. Flores v. Southern Peru Copper Corp. ............................................................133 Personal injury claims brought under the Alien Tort Claims Act were denied, because plaintiffs failed to estab- lish that intranational pollution is prohibited by customary international law. Brown v. Grand Hotel Eden.............................................................................141 Federal District Court dismissed plaintiff’s personal injury suit against Switzerland hotel holding that the hotel’s Web site was not a sufficient basis for jurisdiction despite the fact that the Web site was interactive. DaPuzzo v. Globalvest Management Co., L.P. ................................................149 While the Federal Arbitration Act prohibits federal courts from compelling parties to arbitrate in a nation that is not a signatory to the New York Convention of 1958, courts can further the strong federal policy in favor of arbitration agreements by granting stays of the proceedings or reinforcing the spirit of the parties’ agreement. NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION INTERNATIONAL LAW & PRACTICE SECTION Published with the assistance of St. John’s University School of Law NEW YORK INTERNATIONAL LAW REVIEW Winter 2004 Vol. 17, No. 1 NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION INTERNATIONAL LAW & PRACTICE SECTION © 2004 New York State Bar Association ISSN 1050-9453 INTERNATIONAL LAW & PRACTICE SECTION OFFICERS—2004 Chair ..............................................................Paul M. Frank, Alston & Bird LLP 90 Park Avenue, 15th Floor, New York, NY 10016-1387 Chair-Elect ....................................................Robert J. Leo, Meeks & Sheppard 330 Madison Avenue, 39th Floor, New York, NY 10017-5002 Vice-Chairs ............................. Jonathan I. Blackman, Cleary Gottlieb et al. Albert L. Jacobs, Jr., Greenberg Traurig, LLP One Liberty Plaza, 42nd Floor, New York, NY 10006 885 Third Avenue, 21st Floor, New York, NY 10022 John E. Blyth Allen E. Kaye, Law Offices of Allen E. Kaye, PC 1115 Midtown Tower, Rochester, NY 14604 111 Broadway, New York, NY 10006 Charles Corwin Coward Eduardo Ramos-Gomez, Thacher Proffitt & Wood Jorge Juan 6, Madrid, 28001, Spain Two World Financial Center, New York, NY 10281 David W. Detjen, Alston & Bird, LLP Saul L. Sherman 90 Park Avenue, 14th Floor, New York, NY 10016-1302 PO Box 820, 221 Mecox Road, Water Mill, NY 11976 Joyce M. Hansen, Federal Reserve Bank of NY 33 Liberty Street, 7th Floor, New York, NY 10045 Executive Vice-Chair ......................................John F. Zulack, Flemming Zulack & Williamson, LLP One Liberty Plaza, 35th Floor, New York, NY 10006-1404 Secretary ........................................................Marco A. Blanco, Curtis, Mallet-Prevost et al. 101 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10178-0061 Tre a s u re r .........................................................Lawrence E. Shoenthal, Weiser LLP 135 West 50th Street, 12th Floor, New York, NY 10020 Delegate to the NYSBA House of Delegates .......................................James P. Duffy, III, Berg & Duffy, LLP 585 Stewart Ave., Suite 540, Garden City, NY 11530-4783 NEW YORK INTERNATIONAL LAW REVIEW Advisory Board Chair .........................Ronald D. Greenberg, New York, New York David Buxbaum Frank Fine Monica Petraglia McCabe Guangzhou, China Brussels, Belgium New York, New York Nishith M. Desai Prof. Michael W. Gordon Sven Papp Bombay, India Gainesville, Florida Stockholm, Sweden Michael P. Drzal Larry D. Johnson Charles A. Patrizia Richmond, Virginia New York, New York Washington, D.C. Siegfried H. Elsing Prof. Majid Khadduri Saud M.A. Shawwaf Dusseldorf, Germany Washington, D.C. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Christian Emmeluth Clifford Larsen Koji Takeuchi London, England Paris, France Tokyo, Japan Dr. Alfred S. Farha Kenneth Cang Li Samuel Xiangyu Zhang Zurich, Switzerland New York, New York Washington, D.C. NEW YORK INTERNATIONAL LAW REVIEW Editorial Board Editor-in-Chief..........Lester Nelson New York, NY Executive Editor .............................Alan J. Hartnick Article Editors (continued) ..............Myron J. Laub New York, NY Clifton, NJ Recent Decisions Silvia Madrid Editor ..............................................Peter W. Schroth New York, NY Glastonbury, CT Marisa A. Marinelli Article Editors ................................Alistair F. Bird New York, NY New York, NY George K. Miller Charles Davidson New York, NY New York, NY Michael C. Neus Philip D. Gershuny New York, NY New York, NY Joseph J. Saltarelli Joseph S. Kaplan New York, NY New York, NY David Serko Robert Kestelik New York, NY Houston, TX Shane H. Sutton Prof. Cynthia C. New York, NY Lichtenstein Jacob R. Wyatt Newton Center, MA Washington, D.C. Student Editorial Board St. John’s University School of Law Editor-in-Chief ..........Carol A. Simpao Managing Editor .........Jennifer N. White Associate Managing Editor ........Erin MacAvoy Executive Articles Editor ................Anita Koepcke Executive Notes & Associate Articles Editor..................Richard Bosch Comments Editor .......................... Elizabeth Dineen Associate Articles Editor .................Michael V. Curti Associate Notes & Executive Research Editor ..............Michael Edelman Comments Editor .......................... Nicole Gade Symposium Editor ..........................Suzanne Balsam Associate Notes & Comments Editor .......................... Marisa Silverman Staff Carl Benincasa Jordan O’Brien Cristina Buitron Laura Paris Robert Carroll Anil Prabhu K. C. Cha Teri Ann Puliafico Erica Dziedzic Luciana Reali Arianna Faucetta Fabiana Reyes Natalie Friedenthal Jacqueline Rizk Jessica Giambrone Peggy Shvarts Alicia Givas Joseph Sorrentino Sean Jackson Elliot Steinmetz Edward Kromer Alycia Stevenson Tara Lupoli Christina Tsesmelis Tim Lyster Natasha Turner Kelly McMahon Faculty Advisor: Professor Charles Biblowit INTERNATIONAL LAW & PRACTICE SECTION COMMITTEES Asia Pacific Law ..................... Lawrence A. Darby, III International Matrimonial (212) 836-8235 Law.........................................Rita Wasserstein Warner Henry Tang (212) 593-8000 (212) 408-2586 Central & Eastern European International Privacy Law ......Nava Bat-Avraham and Asian Law........................ Susanne C. Heubel (212) 217-0088 (212) 404-8722 Andre R. Jaglom Serhiy Hoshovsky (212) 508-6740 (212) 370-0447 International Sales & Related Corporate Counsel................. Carole L. Basri Commercial Transactions .......John P. McMahon (212) 982-8243 (704) 372-9148 Michael J. Pisani International Transportation..William H. Hagendorn (212) 858-9548 (914) 337-5861 (fax) Customs and Alfred E. Yudes, Jr. International Trade ................ Stuart M. Rosen (212) 922-2211 (212) 310-8000 Multinational Reorganizations Immigration and & Insolvencies........................Robert W. Dremluk Nationality............................. Jan H. Brown (212) 696-8861 (212) 397-2800 Public International and Inter-American Law Including Comparative Law / Arms Control Free Trade in the Americas..... Carlos E. Alfaro and National Security.............Prof. Charles Biblowit (212) 698-1147 (718) 990-6760 Oliver J. Armas Hon. Edward R. Finch, Jr. (212) 912-7627 (212) 327-0493 International Banking, Publications/ Securities
Recommended publications
  • Evolving Standards, Botched Executions and Utah's Controversial Use of the Firing Squad

    Evolving Standards, Botched Executions and Utah's Controversial Use of the Firing Squad

    Cleveland State Law Review Volume 50 Issue 3 Article 3 2003 Nothing Less than the Dignity of Man: Evolving Standards, Botched Executions and Utah's Controversial Use of the Firing Squad Christopher Q. Cutler Follow this and additional works at: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/clevstlrev Part of the Criminal Law Commons, and the Criminal Procedure Commons How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! Recommended Citation Christopher Q. Culter, Nothing Less than the Dignity of Man: Evolving Standards, Botched Executions and Utah's Controversial Use of the Firing Squad, 50 Clev. St. L. Rev. 335 (2002-2003) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at EngagedScholarship@CSU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cleveland State Law Review by an authorized editor of EngagedScholarship@CSU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NOTHING LESS THAN THE DIGNITY OF MAN: EVOLVING STANDARDS, BOTCHED EXECUTIONS AND UTAH’S CONTROVERSIAL USE OF THE FIRING SQUAD CHRISTOPHER Q. CUTLER1 Human justice is sadly lacking in consolation; it can only shed blood for blood. But we mustn’t ask that it do more than it can.2 I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................... 336 II. HISTORICAL USE OF UTAH’S FIRING SQUAD........................ 338 A. The Firing Squad from Wilderness to Statehood ................................................................. 339 B. From Statehood to Furman ......................................... 347 1. Gary Gilmore to the Present Death Row Crowd ................................................ 357 2. Modern Firing Squad Procedure .......................... 363 III. EIGHTH AMENDMENT JURISPRUDENCE ................................ 365 A. A History of Pain ......................................................... 366 B. Early Supreme Court Cases......................................... 368 C. Evolving Standards of Decency and the Dignity of Man...............................................
  • International Court of Justice Lagrand Case

    International Court of Justice Lagrand Case

    INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE LAGRAND CASE (GERMANY V. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA) --------------------------- COUNTER-MEMORIAL SUBMITTED BY THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 27 MARCH 2000 __________ - i - TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW .................. 1 PART II THE FACTS .................................. 9 CHAPTER I FACTS REGARDING THE LAGRAND BROTHERS ....... 10 CHAPTER II THE MULTIPLE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS ......... 15 CHAPTER III EFFORTS BY THE UNITED STATES TO IMPROVE COMPLIANCE ................................. 17 CHAPTER IV GERMANY'S SPECULATIVE AND UNJUSTIFIED CLAIMS ABOUT THE IMPACT OF CONSULAR ASSISTANCE ................................. 21 Section I. Introduction ........................... 21 Section II. The Brothers Had No Ties with Germany .................................... 22 Section III. The Memorial's Unjustified Claims About Consular Assistance .................. 25 Section IV. The Memorial's Exaggerated Claims About the Potential Impact of Mitigation Evidence ................................... 32 PART III ADMISSIBILITY .............................. 40 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ............................... 40 CHAPTER II GERMANY'S OTHER CLAIMS ARE INADMISSIBLE .... 42 Section I. The Court Need Only Address Germany's First Submission in Order to Do Justice Between the Parties .......... 42 Section II. Germany's Remaining Claims Are Inadmissible Because Germany Asks the Court to Assume an Inappropriate and Unauthorized Role as the Overseer of U.S. National Courts ....................... 43 - ii - Section
  • 1: the State System

    1: the State System

    Public International Law Teaching Material Prepared by: Addisu Damtie & Mr. James Kruger Prepared under the Sponsorship of the Justice and Legal System Research Institute 2009 i Table of contents Chapter 1: Introduction--------------------------------------------------------------------------1 Chapter 2: The State System --------------------------------------------------------------------5 2.1 State Sovereignty ---------------------------------------------------------------------12 Part A. Definition of Sovereignty and History-------------------------------12 Part B. Erosion of State Sovereignty------------------------------------------18 Part C. Theories of State Behavior--------------------------------------------28 2.2 State Formation and Self-Determination of Peoples -----------------------------43 Part A. Legal and Political Issues of Statehood------------------------------43 Part B. The Right of Self-Determination-------------------------------------58 Part C. State Territory and Borders--------------------------------------------79 2.3 State Succession ----------------------------------------------------------------------94 2.4 Recognition of Governments ------------------------------------------------------104 Chapter 3: International Organizations and Other International Actors-----------111 3.1 Characteristics of International Organizations ----------------------------------112 3.2 The Structure of the United Nations ----------------------------------------------118 3.3 A Note on the African Union------------------------------------------------------136
  • Law Review Winter 2006.Book

    Law Review Winter 2006.Book

    NEW YORK INTERNATIONAL LAW REVIEW Winter 2006 Vol. 19, No. 1 Articles Recognition and Enforcement of United States Money Judgments in Brazil Maria Angela Jardim de Santa Cruz Oliveira.....................................................1 A Viable Model for International Criminal Justice: The Special Court for Sierra Leone J. Peter Pham.....................................................................................................37 It's Not All Mutilation: Distinguishing Between Female Genital Mutilation and Female Circumcision Natalie J. Friedenthal.......................................................................................111 Recent Decisions Jama v. Immigration & Customs Enforcement ................................................155 The United States Supreme Court held that removal of a criminally convicted alien pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(2)(E)(iv) does not require advance consent from the recipient country's government. World Book v. International Business Machines Corp. ...................................163 United States District Court for the Southern District of New York followed previous Second Circuit decisions in asserting the need for plaintiffs to prove substantial effects of the alleged trademark infringement on domestic commerce to establish extraterritorial application of the Lanham Act. Bigio v. Coca-Cola Co. ....................................................................................169 In declining to hear this case of Canadian plaintiffs claiming uncompensated expropriation of property
  • Towards the Abolition of the Death Penalty in the United States of America

    Towards the Abolition of the Death Penalty in the United States of America

    AN ASSESSMENT OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE UN UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW: TOWARDS THE ABOLITION OF THE DEATH PENALTY IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Alice Louise Storey This thesis is submitted to Birmingham City University in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Law Faculty of Business, Law and Social Sciences August 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract Acknowledgements List of Terms PART I Chapter One Introduction 1.1 The Death Penalty in the United States 1.2 International Law and the Death Penalty 1.2.1 The United Nations and the Death Penalty 1.2.2 The International Death Penalty Framework 1.2.3 Other Sources of International Law 1.2.4 The Universal Periodic Review and the Death Penalty 1.3 Current Gap in the Research 1.4 Theoretical Framework 1.5 Methodology 1.6 Structure of Thesis Chapter Two The United States and International Law 2.1 The Status of International Law in the US 2.2 Key Legal Principles: Comity and Finality 2.2.1 Comity 2.2.2 Finality 2.3 The Political Framework in the US: The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 2.3.1 Reservations, Understandings, and Declarations 2.3.2 Self-Executing vs. Non-Self-Executing Treaties 2.4 The Adjudicative Framework in the US: The Role of the Supreme Court 2.4.1 Theory of Prominence of US Constitution Over International Law 2.4.2 Theory of Applicability of International Law Only When It Aligns with the US 2 Constitution 2.4.3 Theory of Using International Law to Assist in Interpreting the US Constitution 2.5 Challenging American
  • Implementation of Lagrand and Avena in Germany and the United States: Exploring a Transatlantic Divide in Search of a Uniform Interpretation of Consular Rights

    Implementation of Lagrand and Avena in Germany and the United States: Exploring a Transatlantic Divide in Search of a Uniform Interpretation of Consular Rights

    The European Journal of International Law Vol. 18 no. 2 © EJIL 2007; all rights reserved .......................................................................................... Implementation of LaGrand and Avena in Germany and the United States: Exploring a Transatlantic Divide in Search of a Uniform Interpretation of Consular Rights Carsten Hoppe * Abstract Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations identifi es consular information as an individual right that foreign nationals possess when arrested or detained abroad. The diffi culties encountered by these persons, however, when they seek to vindicate that right before domestic courts has become dramatically visible in the cases of foreigners on death row in the United States. In recent years, three such cases have reached the International Court of Justice (ICJ), two of which were fully litigated. In LaGrand and Avena, the ICJ ordered review and reconsideration where Article 36 rights had been violated and the legal process was already exhausted. Unfortunately, the implementation of these judgments in the United States left much to be desired. The majority opinion in the recent Supreme Court decision in Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon, with its abrasive treatment of the ICJ, forms an unfortunate culmination point of this trend. On the other side of the Atlantic, the German Bundesverfas- sungsgericht fortunately steered a very different course. Contrary to their US counterparts, the German judges had no diffi culty in subordinating their jurisprudence to the decision of a competent international court. Thus, the German judges were prepared, under certain cir- cumstances, to afford ICJ decisions a strong guiding force, even where Germany was not a party to the respective cases.
  • The Bitter Fruit of American Justice

    The Bitter Fruit of American Justice

    A STUDY OF THE INCREASING INTERNATIONAL OPPOSITION TO AND GROWING DOMESTIC DISAFFECTION FROM THE DEATH PENALTY IN AMERICA The Bitter Fruit of American Justice examines two increasingly important factors in the debate over state execution, the conjunction of which may well signal an end to the death penalty in the United States. The first is external to the country: mounting international resistance to state execution is raising the political stakes for the United States. Much of the democratic world has abolished state execution, regarding it as a grave human rights violation. Drawing on new understandings of state sovereignty, these nations are using extradition policies and existing treaty obligations to pressure the United States to end capital punishment. The second is internal to the country: the discovery of large numbers of innocent people on America's death rows has shaken public opinion and political resolve on this issue. The moral potency and rhetorical effectiveness of the innocence argument is radically altering the terms of the debate, undermining traditional justifications for capital punishment and weakening the attitudes of even the most adamant retentionists. Alan W. Clarke and Laurelyn Whitt contend that while there have (Continued on b0ck llap) The Bitter Fruit of American Justice The international and Bitter Fruit domestic resistance of American to the death penalty Justice alan w. clarke & laurelyn whitt northeastern university press Boston Published by university press of new england Hanover and London northeastern university press Published by University Press of New England, One Court Street, Lebanon, NH 03766 www.upne.com © 2007 by Alan W. Clarke and Laurelyn Whitt Printed in the United States of America 54321 All rights reserved.
  • International Court of Justice Lagrand Case

    International Court of Justice Lagrand Case

    INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE LAGRAND CASE (Germany v. United States of America) MEMORIAL OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY Volume I (Text of the Memorial) 16 September 1999 TABLE OF CONTENTS VOLUME I PART ONE: INTRODUCTION 1 PART TWO: STATEMENT OF FACTS 9 PART THREE: JURISDICTION AND ADMISSIBILITY 19 I. The subject-matter of the present dispute 19 II. The legal bond establishing the jurisdiction of the Court in the present Case 21 III. The scope of the Court's jurisdiction under Article I of the Optional Protocol 23 IV. Preconditions of the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice under Article I of the Optional Protocol 27 1. The existence of a "dispute" 27 a) The meaning of the term "dispute" 27 b) The individual issues in dispute between the parties 30 (1) There exists a "dispute" about the interpretation and application of Article 36 (1) of the Vienna Convention 30 (2) There exists a "dispute" about the application and interpretation of Article 36 (2) of the Convention 34 (3) There exists a dispute about the legal effect of the Court's Order on Provisional Measures of 3 March 1999 and the consequences arising therefrom 35 (4) There exists a "dispute" with regard to the remedies owed for the violation on the part of the United States of its international legal obligations 39 2. The existence of a dispute "arising out of the interpretation or application of the [Vienna] Convention" on Consular Relations 40 a) Introductory remarks 40 b) The dispute concerning Article 36 (1) and Article 36 (2) of the Convention 43 c) Remedies owed for the violation of the Vienna Convention falling within the scope of Article I of the Optional Protocol 44 d) The dispute concerning the conduct of the United States vis-à-vis the Court's Order of 3 March 1999 46 3.