International Law Association Committee Research Articles

International Law Association Committee on Participation in Global Cultural Heritage Governance - Executive Summary of Final Report (2022) (German)

International Law Association Committee on Participation in Global Cultural Heritage Governance - Executive Summary of Final Report (2022) (German)

Coalter G. Lathrop, Captain J. Ashley Roach and Donald R. Rothwell, eds., Baselines under the International Law of the Sea (Reports of the International Law Association Committee on Baselines under the International Law of the Sea, Brill Research Perspectives on the Law of the Sea, Brill 2019), 177 pp.

Coalter G. Lathrop, Captain J. Ashley Roach and Donald R. Rothwell, eds., Baselines under the International Law of the Sea (Reports of the International Law Association Committee on Baselines under the International Law of the Sea, Brill Research Perspectives on the Law of the Sea, Brill 2019), 177 pp.

Report on the Kyoto Guidelines of the ILA Committee on Intellectual Property and Private International Law

Abstract In 2010 the International Law Association (ILA) formed a committee to develop a new set of rules on intellectual property and private international law. In 2020 the committee presented its work at the 79th Kyoto Conference of the ILA. The ‘Kyoto Guidelines’ cover all areas of IP and all aspects of private international law. This report presents the Kyoto Guidelines and particularly looks at four questions of private international law: initial ownership; jurisdiction and applicable law in cases of multi-state infringements; validity claims of registered rights which arise incidentally; and cross-border collective copyright management.

Remarks by Rüdiger Wolfrum

It has been argued that the expected sea-level rise will lead to the shifting of baselines. It is further held that, as a matter of consequence, this means that all maritime borders depending upon baselines will have to shift accordingly or have to be renegotiated. This would affect the boundaries vis-à-vis neighboring states, opposite or adjacent, as well as the delineation of the exclusive economic zone and the delineation of the continental shelf if no outer continental shelf (no shelf beyond 200 nm) exists. The Baselines Committee of the International Law Association (ILA) stated that in “extreme circumstances [landward changes of the baseline] could result in total territorial loss and the consequent total loss of baselines and of the maritime zones measured from those baselines. The existing law of the normal baselines does not offer an adequate solution to this potentially serious problem.” I see the logic of the arguments based upon Articles 3, 4, and 5 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Nevertheless, I disagree with the interpretation of UNCLOS Articles 3 and 4. In consequence thereof, I disagree with the qualification that baselines are “ambulatory.” In my view, other considerations have to be taken into account—see below. I am pleased to note that the ILA Committee on sea-level rise in its report took a more balanced view than the Baselines Committee.

Islands Awash Amidst Rising Seas: Sea Level Rise and Insular Status under the Law of the Sea

Abstract This article considers the potential impacts of sea level rise on maritime zones with particular reference to impacts on islands. It considers the sea level rise predictions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; it outlines the existing legal framework for coastal baselines and insular features established by the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention. It highlights the work of the International Law Association Committee on International Law and Sea Level Rise, which in its 2018 report had identified the development of a body of State practice among the States and Territories of the South Pacific regarding the maintenance of existing maritime zone claims in the face of sea level rise. That practice is considered, together with the implications of the 2016 Tribunal Award on the South China Sea case on maritime zone claims based on islands.

International Law and Sea Level Rise

AbstractThis issue contains the final version of the 2018 Report of the International Law Association (ILA) Committee on International Law and Sea Level Rise, as well as the related ILA Resolutions 5/2018 and 6/2018, both as adopted by the ILA at its 78th Biennial Conference, held in Sydney, Australia, 19–24 August 2018.In Part I of the Report, key information about the establishment of the Committee, its mandate and its work so far is presented. Also, the background for the establishment of the Committee is explained, drawing on: (a) conclusions of the ILA Committee on Baselines and the related ILA Resolution 1/2012; (b) scientific assessments, such as by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), regarding on-going sea level change and projections of future rise; and (c) more broadly, scientific findings regarding the profound changes taking place in the Earth system since the mid-20th century and predictions for their acceleration in the course of the 21st century. All of this has prompted the need, and provided the Committee with the relevant context, for the study of the options and elaboration of proposals for the development of international law.Part II of the Report addresses key law of the sea issues through a study of possible impacts of sea level rise and their implications under international law regarding maritime limits lawfully determined by the coastal States, and the agreed or adjudicated maritime boundaries. This includes the study of the effects of sea level rise on the limits of maritime zones, and the analysis of the subsequently emerging State practice regarding the maintenance of their existing lawful maritime entitlements. The guiding consideration in developing the proposals and recommendations by the Committee for the interpretation and development of international law regarding the maritime limits and boundaries impacted by sea level rise has been the need to avoid uncertainty and, ultimately, facilitate orderly relations between States and contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security. A related ILA Resolution 5/2018 addresses maritime limits and boundaries impacted by sea level rise.Part III of the Report addresses international law provisions, principles and frameworks for the protection of persons displaced in the context of sea level rise. The notion of ‘human mobility’ is used as an umbrella term that refers to all relevant forms of the movement of persons and, in the context of this report, covers displacement (which is forced), migration (which is predominantly voluntary), planned relocation and evacuations (which both may be forced or voluntary). This part of the report takes the form of principles entitled the ‘Sydney Declaration of Principles on the Protection of Persons Displaced in the Context of Sea Level Rise’ with commentaries. Accordingly, ILA Resolution 6/2018, which also contains the Sydney Declaration of Principles, addresses the protection of persons displaced in the context of sea level rise and contains recommendations by the Committee to this effect.

The International Law Association Helsinki Rules

AbstractAlthough the International Law Association (ILA) was established in 1873, it only turned its attention to the internationally shared water resources in 1954, when its study of the applicable principles and rules of international law thereon began. The first ILA committee assigned to this task was the Rivers Committee, which, after a decade of intensive study and through several resolutions and statements, arrived unanimously at a set of articles reflecting customary international law, known as The Helsinki Rules on the Uses of the Waters of International Rivers.The Helsinki Rules approved at the ILA Helsinki Conference in 1966 were soon widely accepted across the globe as a non-binding authoritative source of international water law. This monograph traces the work of ILA leading to the approval of the Helsinki Rules, analyses the Rules, and identifies their influence on, and contribution to the evolution of international water law.

EU Geographical Indications and Intangible Cultural Heritage

Misappropriation of intangible cultural expressions occurs in countries other than their state of origin and is therefore of a transnational nature. In 2003 the UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage was adopted to safeguard intangible cultural heritage (ICH) at the domestic and international level. However, this Convention lacks rules on transnational misappropriation. To safeguard ICH across borders, the States Parties adopt intellectual property rights (IPRs) of a collective nature, in particular geographical indications (GIs). However, registration of GIs in the country of origin of the ICH cannot safeguard it across the globe. Indeed, GIs must not only be registered in their country of origin, but also in other jurisdictions. Hence, certain States Parties register GIs in their respective territories, as well as in other countries. In particular, EU GIs are registered by non-EU Member States. However, multi-state registrations of GIs still cannot safeguard ICH transnationally, since the parallel GIs must currently be enforced in each and every country of registration, even in the case of EU GIs. In fact, the EU Quality Schemes Regulation does not establish a system of cross-border enforcement of GIs and must be integrated in the EU private international law rules of the Brussels system. This system applies an exclusive jurisdiction rule to transnational disputes on IPRs, however, which implies multiple parallel proceedings, with the risk of conflicting judgments, considerable litigation costs and inequalities between parties, particularly when IPR holders are the ICH bearers, and are therefore communities, groups or individuals. Yet, unlike transnational disputes concerning IPRs, those regarding GIs do not fall under the exclusive jurisdiction rule of the Brussels system. Thus, this system allows for their consolidation before a single competent court. This consolidation would be in line with recent international academic proposals, among them the International Law Association Committee on Intellectual Property and Private International Law.

The Cultural Heritage Law Committee of the International Law Association: General Session, August 16, 2010

Twenty-two members of the International Law Association's Committee on Cultural Heritage Law attended a working session in The Hague. The committee first reviewed the status of its past projects, focusing this time on the UNESCO Convention for the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage, which resulted from the Committee's Buenos Aires Draft Convention on that subject. Now that the treaty is in force, the committee considered the actual and potential status of accession by maritime powers.

International Law Association – Committee on International Commercial Arbitration – Ascertaining the Contents of the Applicable Law in International Commercial Arbitration – Report for

International Law Association – Committee on International Commercial Arbitration – Ascertaining the Contents of the Applicable Law in International Commercial Arbitration – Report for

Final ILA Report on Public Policy as a Bar to Enforcement of International Arbitral Awards

THIS IS the Final Report of the International Law Association Committee on International Commercial Arbitration on the topic of public policy as a ground for refusing recognition1 and enforcement of international arbitral awards. The Committee has agreed upon a number of Recommendations as to the application of public policy by State courts.2 This Final Report sets out the Recommendations and provides a brief commentary on each. This Report should be read together with the Committee's Interim Report presented at the London Conference in June 2000 (‘Interim Report’).3 The Recommendations are the culmination of a six year study of public policy by the Committee, starting after the Helsinki Conference in 1996.4 The Recommendations themselves have been discussed and agreed by the Committee at meetings in London (June 2000), Amsterdam (September 2000), Paris (January 2002) and at the Conference Working Session in New Delhi (April 2002). A number of Committee members have made written comments. ### Recommendation 1(a) The finality of awards rendered in the context of international commercial arbitration should be respected save in exceptional circumstances. Those who drafted the New York Convention intended that enforcement should be refused only in a number of limited circumstances [ see Article V). This was also the objective of the UNCITRAL Model Law ( see Article 36). An enforcement court must carry out a balancing exercise between finality and justice. The New York Convention and the Model Law permit such an exercise by making the court's power discretionary, i.e . enforcement ‘may’ be refused. Many courts have expressed a policy favouring enforcement.5 For example, the European Court of Justice in Eco Swiss China Time Ltd v. Benetton International NV (1999) stated:6 > it is in the interest of efficient arbitration proceedings that review of arbitration awards should be limited in scope and that …

International Law Association Committee on Cultural Heritage

International Law Association Committee on Cultural Heritage

International Law Association Committee on International Law in National Courts: Report of the Australian Branch Prepared by members of the Australian Branch of the International Law Association

International Law Association Committee on International Law in National Courts: Report of the Australian Branch Prepared by members of the Australian Branch of the International Law Association

Responsibility of States in Respect of the Exercise of Permanent Sovereignty over Natural Resources: An Analysis of Some Principles of the Seoul Declaration (1986) by the International Law Association

The adoption of the Declaration on the Progressive Development of Principles of Public International Law relating to a New International Economic Order (Seoul Declaration) by the 62nd Conference of the International Law Association (ILA) in 1986 set the seal on eight years of hard work by the ILA's Committee on Legal Aspects of a New International Economic Order (NIEO Committee). However, it certainly did not mark the end of the Committee's efforts.

The Effect of Independence on Treaties. By the International Law Association Committee on State Succession to Treaties and Other Governmental Obligations. London: Stevens & Sons; South Hackensack, N.J.: Fred B. Rothman & Co., 1965. pp. xvi, 391. $17.50.

The Effect of Independence on Treaties. By the International Law Association Committee on State Succession to Treaties and Other Governmental Obligations. London: Stevens & Sons; South Hackensack, N.J.: Fred B. Rothman & Co., 1965. pp. xvi, 391. $17.50.