Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSOURESH, Anogika
dc.date.accessioned2017-04-10T16:34:54Z
dc.date.available2017-04-10T16:34:54Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.citationEuropean journal of legal studies, 2017, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 15-36en
dc.identifier.issn1973-2937
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1814/46066
dc.description.abstractThis article explores the decision in Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v Italy: Greece Intervening) regarding the relationship between State immunities and jus cogens norms. It focuses on three assertions in the case, regarding the criminal/civil distinction, the procedural/substantive distinction and the pronouncement that the gravity of the crime is irrelevant when assessing the claim for State immunity. The article picks apart the three assertions in turn, which leads to the conclusion that the analysis by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) was flawed. Ultimately, it is argued that Germany ought not to have been afforded State immunity for violations of jus cogens norms.en
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherEuropean University Instituteen
dc.relation.ispartofEuropean journal of legal studiesen
dc.relation.urihttps://ejls.eui.eu/en
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen
dc.titleJurisdictional immunities of the state : why the ICJ got it wrongen
dc.typeArticleen
dc.identifier.volume9en
dc.identifier.startpage15en
dc.identifier.endpage36en
eui.subscribe.skiptrue
dc.identifier.issue2en


Files associated with this item

Icon

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record