Sentences with phrase «jurisdictional immunities»

To elaborate, the majority opinion took great pains [see FR, pp. 75 - 76] to highlight the similarities between the Hellenic and the Italian legal order, while endorsing unconditionally the position adopted by the Constitutional Court of Italy in its celebrated Sentenza 238/2014 (nullifying as unconstitutional a municipal law binding domestic courts to follow the ICJ's ruling in the Jurisdictional Immunities Case).

In a likewise manner, the FR approaches quite descriptively the ICJ's majority opinion in the Jurisdictional Immunities Case, without reference to the merits of the judgment.

One or two Treaties have tried to codified it (e.g. the 1972 Basel Convention; and the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property, adopted on 2 December 2004) however these Treaties do not have many signatories.

This is a key distinction, preserved by the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and their Property (the UN convention), Art 19.

As regards the immunity of the State, the 6 - 1 decision in Jones and Others v the United Kingdom to uphold the immunity of Saudi Arabia was to be expected: in the Jurisdictional Immunities Judgment, the principal judicial organ of the UN clearly stated that that there was no exception to State immunity for jus cogens violations.

On the other hand, according to the prevailing opinion (upheld by the ICJ in the Jurisdictional Immunities Judgment), the State on whose behalf the accused official was acting enjoys immunity from the civil jurisdiction of foreign States for the very same crimes.

Even though France ratified the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of State and their Property of 2004 (UNCSI) with Law No. 2011 - 734 of June 28, 2011, contrary to Japan, Spain and Sweden, France did not incorporate the Convention into domestic law.

In that Sentenza, the Corte refused to give effect to the ICJ's judgment (in) Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy) of 3 February 2012, in which the ICJ had upheld the principle of state immunity against allegations of serious human rights violations of German state organs committed during the Second World War.

In doing so, he referred to the US and European provisions and to Article 7 (1)(b) of the 2004 UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and their Property, which Lord Bingham had referred to in Jones v Saudi Arabia [2007] 1 AC 70 at paragraphs 8 and 26 (d) as reflecting current international thinking.

Moreover, the 2004 UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and their Property, to which neither the UAE, nor Iraq or the FRI are party, represents current international thinking at the time of the Contract and now, provides that waiver of suit and execution can be effective in a written contract as well as a submission in the face of the court.

In doing so, it placed especial emphasis on the fact that a similarly structured provision was dropped from the final text of the UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities for States and their Properties 2004, as it was considered contrary to the principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality, one of the cornerstones of international law.

On the 4th of July, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) decided that Greece can intervene in the Jurisdictional Immunities of the State case (Germany v. Italy).

The pleas of state immunity fail, as the interests or activities covered by the UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and their Property 2004, art 6 (2)(b) do not include reputational damage suffered by foreign states if it is proven that foreign officials acted contrary to their own laws.

They plainly required the parties to recognise and to give effect to a broad jurisdictional immunity possessed by each specialised agency.

The immunity at stake in JASTA is jurisdictional immunity.

The existence of jurisdictional immunity of the State was confirmed by the International Court of Justice in its judgment of 3 February 2012 in Germany v Italy.

It covers administrative, civil, and criminal proceedings (jurisdictional immunity), as well as enforcement measures (enforcement immunity).

It is fairly evident that the Committee tried to instrumentalize its FR in order to provide the other constitutional authorities (the Government and — most certainly — the Judiciary) with somewhat of a saving (or escaping) clause in order to overcome the stagnation caused by the Margellos doctrine and the ICJ's authoritative distinction between procedural conditions, such as the jurisdictional immunity of the defendant State, and the merits of the case, even if the contested affair involves grave violations of jus cogens norms.

In the aforementioned judgment the Special Court upheld the jurisdictional immunity of Germany, while overriding the normative hierarchy theory adopted by the plenary session of the Areios Pagos, the Supreme Court of Civil Cassation, in its Judgment 11/2000 concerning the Distomo Case.

Not exact matches

In the Supreme Court of Canada's Tsilhqot «in decision (para 148) they said: «Interjurisdictional immunity — premised on a notion that regulatory environments can be divided into watertight jurisdictional compartments — is often at odds with modern reality.

Similarly, if the case involves governmental immunity, federal court jurisdiction or other jurisdictional matters, the lawyer may want to avoid the complications that these factors may entail.

State immunity would have been enough on its own to dispose of the injunction, but the court also dealt with the important jurisdictional issues raised by ETI's reliance on Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982, s 25 as the basis for the court's jurisdiction

This article discusses jurisdictional law in Switzerland, and nothing there indicates that there is any immunity conferred by wrong - doing in an ISO building.

We respectfully submit that an important jurisdictional issue and constitutional question is presented by this case, and that a failure of the Supreme Court to review the findings of the Board of Governors will have the effect of voiding the Judicial Immunity Doctrine, and will destroy the justification for the existence of the Judicial Conduct Commission.

If the Supreme Court does not review this jurisdictional issue, then there will be established a precedent which will void the Doctrine of Judicial Immunity.