Read more
Reports in English on decisions of international courts and arbitrators and judgments of national courts.
List of contents
1. Legality of Use of Force (Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro v. Belgium) (Provisional Measures) (Preliminary Objections) [INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]; 2. Legality of Use of Force (Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro v. Canada) (Provisional Measures) (Preliminary Objections) (NOTE) [INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]; 3. Legality of Use of Force (Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro v. France) (Provisional Measures) (Preliminary Objections) (NOTE) [INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]; 4. Legality of Use of Force (Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro v. Germany) (Provisional Measures) (Preliminary Objections) (NOTE) [INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]; 5. Legality of Use of Force (Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro v. Italy) (Provisional Measures) (Preliminary Objections) (NOTE) [INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]; 6. Legality of Use of Force (Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro v. Netherlands) (Provisional Measures) (Preliminary Objections) (NOTE) [INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]; 7. Legality of Use of Force (Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro v. Portugal) (Provisional Measures) (Preliminary Objections) (NOTE) [INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]; 8. Legality of Use of Force (Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro v. Spain) (Provisional Measures) (NOTE) [INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]; 9. Legality of Use of Force (Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro v. United Kingdom) (Provisional Measures) (Preliminary Objections) (NOTE) [INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]; 10. Legality of Use of Force (Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro v. United States of America) (Provisional Measures) (NOTE) [INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]; 11. Indus Waters Kishenganga Arbitration (Islamic Republic of Pakistan v. Republic of India) (Final Award) [COURT OF ARBITRATION]; (see 150 ILR 311 and 154 ILR 1 for previous stages of case); 12. Indus Waters Kishenganga Arbitration (Islamic Republic of Pakistan v. Republic of India) (Decision on India's Request for Clarification or Interpretation dated 20 May 2013) [COURT OF ARBITRATION]; (see 150 ILR 311 and 154 ILR 1 for previous stages of case); 13. M/V Louisa (Saint Vincent and the Grenadines v. Kingdom of Spain) (Merits) [INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE LAW OF THE SEA]; (provisional measures published in 148 ILR 459); 14. General Comment No 22 on the Right to Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion (Article 18) [UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE]; 15. Yoon and Choi v. Korea (Communication Nos 1321/2004 and 1322/2004) [UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE]; 16. Jeong and Others v. Korea (Communication Nos 1642-1741/2007) [UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE]; 17. Atasoy and Sarkut v. Turkey (Communication Nos 1853/2008 and 1854/2008) [UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE] ; 18. Kim and Others v. Korea (Communication No 1786/2008) [UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE]; 19. Attorney General of Canada on behalf of United States of America v. Khadr Court of Appeal for Ontario (2011 ONCA 358) [CANADA]; 20. Re: Aerial Drone Deployment on 4 October 2010 in Mir Ali, Pakistan (Case No 3 BJs 7/12-4) (Targeted Killing in Pakistan Case) (Federal Prosecutor General) [GERMANY]; Decision to Terminate Proceedings.
About the author
Elihu Lauterpacht is an Honorary Professor of International Law, University of Cambridge, and a Bencher of Gray's Inn.Christopher J. Greenwood is a Professor of International Law, London School of Economics and Political Science, and a Bencher of the Middle Temple.Karen Lee is a Fellow of the Lauterpacht Research Centre of International Law, University of Cambridge, and a Fellow of Girton College, Cambridge.
Summary
Volume 157 reports on, amongst others, the International Court of Justice Legality of Use of Force cases and the December 2013 Final Award and Decision on the Request for Clarification of the Court of Arbitration in the Indus Waters Kishenganga Arbitration.
