Denial Of Justice Research Articles

Intervention: Individual and Collective

Of all the terms in general use in international law none is more challenging than that of “ intervention.” Scarcely any two writers are to be found who define this term in the same way or who classify the same situations under it. To one writer it is the interference of one state in the affairs of another; to a second writer it is “ unwarranted” interference; to a third it is interference in the domestic or internal affairs of the state; to a fourth it is interference in external as well as internal affairs. Some writers include interference of a third state between two belligerents in time of war, by taking sides with one against the other; others include only interference between the parties to a civil war. Some include “ diplomatic intervention,” where the intervening state interferes in behalf of its citizens in cases of alleged denial of justice by the other state; others regard such interference merely as “ interposition,” since it does not involve an attempt to control the character of the foreign government but merely to influence its conduct. Many jurists regard all intervention as illegal; an American jurist constructs an entire volume on international law around the central theme of the right of intervention.

Interocean Transportation Company of America v. The United States of America.

Claims — Measure of Damages — Speculative Damages.Arbitration — In General — Nature of Arbitration Proceedings between Governments and Private Parties in Matters Arising out of an Inter-State Claim.Claims — Denial of Justice — Denial of Justice in Judgments on Questions of Fact — Absence of Credible Evidence — Exhaustion of Legal Remedies — Illusory Remedies — Measure of Damages — Speculative Damages — Nature of Arbitration Proceedings between Government and a Private Party in Matters Arising out of an Inter-State Claim.

In re Gill.

State Responsibility — Denial of Justice — Executive Inaction — Burden of Proof.

In re The Interoceanic Railway of Mexico Limited, The Mexican Eastern Railway Company Limited, and The Mexican Southern Railway Limited.

Denial of Justice — Meaning of — Acts of Non-Judicial Authorities — Whether Constituting Denial of Justice — Effect on Calvo Clause.

In re El Oro Mining and Railway Company (Limited).

Denial of Justice — Undue Delay of Justice — Meaning of — Effect on Calvo Clause.

The Concept of "Denial of Justice" in Latin America

The Concept of "Denial of Justice" in Latin America

The Panevezys-Saldutiskis Railway Case.

State Responsibility — Claims — Nationality of — Exception to the Rules of — Jurisdictional Objection Based on the Rule as to Nationality of Claims — How far Constituting a Preliminary Objection — Article 62 of the Rules of the Court.Permanent Court of International Justice — Statute of — Rules of Article 62 — Preliminary Objection and Decision on the Merits.State Responsibility — Denial of Justice — Exhaustion of Local Remedies — Exceptions to the Rule of — Nationality of Claims — Exceptions to the Rule of — Rules of the Permanent Court of International Justice — Article 62 of the Rules — Preliminary Objections — Connection with Objections Relating to the Merits of the Case.

Expropriation of Foreign Property

Strange as it may seem, a coherent theory of expropriation as a separate institution has not been developed in the literature of international law. For the most part only partial aspects of the subject have been treated, and under widely differing categories, e.g., under the general title of “ rights of foreigners,” or “ denial of justice,” or “ international responsibility of states.” But international practice, as embodied in diplomatic and judicial cases, yields sufficient material from which to develop a theory of expropriation as a coherent body of rules of positive international law.

Solomon Claim.

State Responsibility — Denial of Justice — Palpable Miscarriage of Justice — Improper Conduct of Prosecution — Unconscious Susceptibility of Judges to Local Sentiment.

Denham Case.

Measure of Damages — Measure of Damages for Inadequate Punishment of Offences against Aliens.248Responsibllity of States — Denial of Justice — Failure to Inflict Punishment — Basis of Liabllity for Failure to Inflict Adequate Punishment — Reduction of Sentence for Good Conduct — Further Reduction under General Amnesty — Measure of Damages — Measure of Damages for Inadequate Punishment of Offences against Aliens.

De Sabla Claim.

Claims — Succession to Claims — Law Governing such Succession.Aliens — Treatment of — Respect of Property of Aliens — Wrongful Grants of Private Property.State Responsibility — Denial of Justice — Regulations Governing Grants of Public Lands — Wrongful Grants of Private Property — “International Standards” of Effectiveness of Remedy of Protest — Claims — Succession to Claims — The Law Governing such Succession.

Gust Adams Claim.

Measure of Damages — Denial of Justice — Failure to Inflict Adequate Punishment.Denial of Justice — Failure to Inflict Adequate Punishment — Assault on Alien by Policeman — Measure of Damages.

Chase Claim.

Denial of Justice — Interference with Property Rights.Diplomatic Envoys — Functions of — Assistance of Individuals in Settling Differences with Government — How far Estopping Home State from Putting Forward Claims.Arbitration — Evidence — Estoppel.State Responsibility — In General — Limitations of — Estoppel — Settlement Achieved with the Assistance of a Diplomatic Officer — Effect on Claim before Arbitral Tribunal — Diplomatic Action Following upon Authorisation of Individual Claimant Alone — Denial of Justice as a Result of Interference with Property Rights.

Finnish Vessels in Great Britain during the War.

Denial of Justice — Exhaustion of Legal Remedies — Adequacy of Legal Remedies — Burden of Proof in Arbitration Proceedings.

The International Responsibility of States for Denial of Justice

The International Responsibility of States for Denial of Justice

The International Responsibility of States for Denial of Justice. By Alwyn V. Freeman. (London and New York: Longmans, Green and Company. 1938. Pp. 758. $12.50.)

The International Responsibility of States for Denial of Justice. By Alwyn V. Freeman. (London and New York: Longmans, Green and Company. 1938. Pp. 758. $12.50.)

Origin and Development of Denial of Justice

The legal aspects of denial of justice and its position in the framework of international law have been expounded in a number of important works.1 Regarding the history of the doctrine, however, there appears to be no work of any importance, apart from the excellent observations of Charles De Visscher.2 This is not in any way surprising in view of the fact that the history of international law is a subject which does not receive the attention it deserves, and more particularly in view of the legend, which has been disproved in a convincing manner by James Brown Scott, that there was no system of international law prior to the days of Grotius. Yet the history of denial of justice is not only extremely interesting, but it also throws light on some of the most important institutions of modern international law.

The Meaning of the Term Denial of Justice in International Law

The term “denial of justice” has been used widely to describe certain types of acts and omissions of States directed against foreigners deemed to be internationally illegal and justifying diplomatic interposition by the aggrieved State. There is no agreement, however, as to the precise scope of the term. In attempting to determine whether a single definite meaning can be assigned to the expression, emphasis must be placed upon its actual use in diplomatic practice and in the decisions of international tribunals, for the opinions of writers, no matter how authoritative, may not correspond with the practice of States. A few general considerations may be suggested by way of introduction.

Mexican Union Railway (Limited).

State Responsibility — Denial of Justice — Calvo Clause — Exhaustion of Legal Remedies.Claims — Character of — Calvo Clause — Denial of Justice.Arbitration — Law Applied by Arbitral Tribunals — British Answer to the Questionnaire in connection with Codification of International Law.207Position of Individuals in International Law — Exclusion of Protection by Home State — Limits of the Calvo Clause — Private Nature of International Claims — Denial of Justice.

Clyde Dyches Case.

State Responsibility — Denial of Justice — Absence of Impartial Trial — Prolonged Imprisonment — Undue Delay in Judicial Proceedings.