To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The Cape Town Convention is widely regarded as the most successful international convention in terms of ratifications. This essay aims to explore the fundamental reasons behind this success. While it is undeniable that the Cape Town Convention receives substantial industrial support in response to urgent market demands and the innovative protocols it established, this essay argues that this alone does not fundamentally explain its success.
Instead, the underlying reason lies in the Convention’s ability to avoid the trap of a false dichotomy – where one side seeks to convince the other to agree with its viewpoint. Rather, the key is to strive for a viable compromise that accommodates the perspectives of both, or even multiple stakeholders. This proposition will be illustrated by drawing on the social science concept of coordination, through a comparative analysis of the drafting processes of the Cape Town Convention and the Hague Securities Convention.
This chapter begins by introducing the concept of corporate governance, and the regulatory role of directors’ duties. An appreciation of corporate governance methodologies gives context to the ‘hard law’ of directors’ duties. The chapter then considers who falls within the definition of director, the role of the director within the company, and how that role attracts legal and non-legal regulation. It also identifies who, beyond directors, can also be subject to directors’ duties. The chapter revisits the history of directors’ duties within Australian corporate law, building on the historical context provided by Chapter 1, and exploring the interrelationship between the duties applicable at common law, in equity, and according to statute. It concludes with the consequences of breach of the civil penalty provisions and options for exoneration and relief under the Corporations Act.
This chapter discusses the legal capacity of a company to enter contracts. We discuss how companies enter contracts through agents and the statutory assumptions that protect third parties when dealing with companies. We also discuss pre-incorporation contracts.
There are several competing policy issues in this area of law. It is important that companies can enter contracts easily and be bound by their obligations. It is also important that third parties are not prejudiced if the internal requirements of a company in terms of capacity or authority to act as the company are not complied with. Both the law of contract and the Corporations Act seek to balance these issues—sometimes in interesting ways. It is useful to keep these policy perspectives in mind when studying this area of law.
Americans understood the importance of establishing judicial authority over maritime war from the moment they began resisting British hegemony in the 1770s. The states’ unwillingness to prevent American seafarers from violating the rights of foreigners during the American Revolution provoked diplomatic controversies that undermined the drive for independence. After the war, supporters and skeptics of the new Constitution fiercely debated its creation of a federal judiciary. Anti-Federalist critics feared the centralizing and despotic tendencies of life-tenured judges who would be “subject to no control.” But even the “most bigotted idolizers of state authority,” Alexander Hamilton famously wrote in The Federalist, agreed that the federal courts should have exclusive authority over maritime cases. If Americans truly wanted a government that could fulfill the nation’s international obligations and maintain harmony with other sovereigns, they needed a judiciary with the power to resolve disputes arising at sea.
Chapter 2 turns to the period directly after ratification, from 1954 to 1962, and shows how this was a remarkable lively period.
It makes two distinct claims. First, it contests the pervasive image that the Convention was ‘asleep’ in the domestic legal context. Rather, the Convention was immediately tried and tested and entered the domestic context in a flurry of heated activity, as litigants and other players set out their campaigns to define what the Convention would mean.
Second, it argues that the restrictive policy of the European Commission of Human Rights was a conscious legal strategy. Following the experiences of the Dutch member of the Commission and the national interaction with the European institutions, it can be argued how restraint was indeed part of a conscious effort to let states accept the right of individual petition. Simultaneously, however, the European Court embarked on campaigns to make the Court relevant.
The chapter ends in 1962 with failure on both the domestic and the European levels to make the Convention into something more than a distant document. These failures were essential in setting the stage for the Convention’s perceived legal irrelevance in the following two decades.
Several provisions of the Convention deal with technical matters under treaty law, including signature, ratification and accession to the Convention, entry into force, denunciation of the Convention, the role of the Secretary-General as depositary of the treaty, and revision of the treaty. There is no provision for reservations but they have been deemed to be acceptable to the extent that they are not contrary to the object and purpose of the Convention. The official languages of the Convention are Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish. The Chinese language version has been changed due to dissatisfaction to the original text, prompting protests from Lemkin and others. The status of the official Chinese text remains somewhat uncertain. The Convention also contains a ’colonial clause’, something that is today an anachronism but one that apparently permits States to avoid the application of the Convention in non-self-governing territories over which they exercise control.
This chapter provides a rough summary of how the United States came to be a federation of states rather than a unitary nation. To that end, it offers a thumbnail sketch of the timeline from the British colonial period to adoption of the US Constitution. The debates at the constitutional convention and the advocacy in both the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers are highlighted, with particular emphasis on the role of state sovereignty and the menu of choices that were open to the framers.
Legal scholars continue to revisit historical treaties between Western and non-Western nations to challenge long-standing accounts of non-Western peoples’ engagement with international law. Following this trend, new scholarship has stressed African agency in Euro-African treaty-making. However, legal scholars have generally overlooked African perspectives, pointing to a lack of sources. Focusing on nineteenth-century treaty-making between France and the polities of the Western Sudan in West Africa, this article excavates African perspectives through a novel reading of Euro-African treaties in an African context. This reading analyses treaties within the Western Sudan’s broader diplomatic corpus in both French and Arabic. By focusing on markers of translation, transcription, and negotiation left on different copies of treaties, this method brings to light arguments and practices that have been obscured in published European-language versions. Reading Franco-Sudanian treaties in a Sudanian context reveals that different norms governed the ratification of treaties in the Western Sudan and Europe. Treaties that scholars have long considered unratified were in fact ratified according to Western Sudanian norms, which designated the governor of French Senegal rather than the French president as the official competent to ratify treaties for France. However, when French officials sought to use treaties to claim sovereign rights in West Africa against Great Britain, they pressed the president to ratify them again. Presidential ratification thus served to transpose Franco-Sudanian treaties from an African to a Western normative order. Uncovering the African origins of Euro-African treaties thus reveals their differential operation across autonomous inter-polity orders.
Do recent increases in women’s representation around the world have implications for international relations? We argue that greater representation of women in legislatures increases the likelihood of human rights treaty ratification for two reasons. First, given their shared gendered experiences of exclusion and discrimination, women legislators will advocate on behalf of marginalized groups on an international scale as transnational surrogate representatives. Second, women legislators may be more inclined to prioritize the ratification of human rights treaties because these treaties align with their domestic policy preferences, which aim to support marginalized groups. We contend that, in countries where ratification depends upon legislative approval, legislatures are more likely to ratify human rights treaties as women’s presence increases. Using an original dataset of 201 multilateral treaties, we find that countries become more likely to ratify human rights treaties as levels of women’s legislative representation increase.
Before the 20th century, most rules of international law were in the form of customary international law. Since then, the increased complexity of international relations and rapid international development have led to a substantial growth in the number and diversity of treaties. Article 38(1)(a) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice (‘ICJ Statute’) recognises treaties as a (material) source of international law by referring to ‘international conventions, whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly recognized by the contesting states’. Treaties now regulate trade, communications, environmental protection, military cooperation and defence, and human rights, to name but a few of the myriad topics. International environmental law, for example, is almost entirely governed by treaties, and international trade, investment and communications ‘are unimaginable without treaties’. The main rules in the law of treaties are contained in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (‘VCLT’), which governs treaty relations between states and is the focus of this chapter.
This new edition of a textbook first published in 2000 provides a comprehensive account of the law of treaties from the viewpoint of two experienced practitioners. It draws on the combined experience of Anthony Aust, the original author, and Jeremy Hill, until recently Legal Counsellor in the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, London. The book provides a wealth of examples of the problems experienced with treaties on a daily basis. The authors explore numerous precedents from treaties and other related documents, such as non-legally binding instruments. Using clear and accessible language, the authors cover the full extent of treaty law, with both practitioners and students in mind. Modern Treaty Law and Practice is essential reading for officials in governments and international organisations, lawyers practising in international law, and teachers and students of law, political science, international relations and diplomacy who have an interest in treaties.
This chapter examines how a state becomes a party to a treaty, including signature, initialling and ratification, where applicable. Whether a state can participate in a multilateral treaty depends on the terms of the treaty. The practice of the Council of Europe is examined. Signature may express consent to be bound but often signature will be subject to ratification. Ratification is the international act whereby a state establishes on the international plane its consent to be bound. It is to be distinguished from the domestic process which enables a state to ratify. Advice is given on the form and content of an instrument of ratification. A state may also consent to be bound by acceptance, approval or accession. Accession is primarily the means by which a state may become a party if it is unable to sign the treaty. The chapter also examines rights and obligations prior to entry into force, the possibility of withdrawing consent to be bound, and the ways in which treaties might be developed.
One key feature of the Constitution – the concept of federalism – was unclear when it was introduced, and threatened the Constitution’s ratification by those who feared the new government would undermine state sovereignty. In their famous essays in The Federalist, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison defended the Constitution and argued that state legislatures would sound the alarm if the national government exceeded its authority. They argued that through interposition state legislatures would effectively check the national government by mobilizing resistance should the government try to overreach. Resolutions passed by legislators could legitimately be considered an expression of the people that could then be shared with the state’s congressional delegation and other state legislatures. Hamilton’s and Madison’s advocacy for state legislatures as monitors of the equilibrium of the two levels of government under the Constitution was a rhetorical argument designed to address the objections of Anti-Federalists. At the time of the ratification debates, both men were deeply distrustful of state legislatures, yet needed to explain how the national government would not overwhelm the states.
Scholars often point to pressure from the United States as a key factor in driving membership in the nuclear nonproliferation regime, but this explanation has trouble explaining the changes we see in patterns of membership over time. This chapter shows that variation in the perceived effectiveness of the regime – as indicated by overall membership, the strength of verification measures, the effectiveness of enforcement, and a history of cooperation – better explains why states join. Member states are reluctant to forgo nuclear weapons without assurances that others will comply as well, and signals of regime effectiveness reassure states that their commitments will be reciprocated. This argument runs counter to the conventional wisdom among international organizations scholars, that there is a “depth versus breadth” tradeoff in institutional design. Drawing from archival documents, this chapter discusses the illustrative cases of the NPT ratification decision in Australia and Switzerland. It then tests its theory using data on state membership in the NPT.
Equity closely scrutinises relationships in which one party places trust and confidence in another. There are many examples of trust in human interaction, but equity cannot grant relief against every breach of trust and confidence, any more than contract law can enforce all promises. Only some trusting relationships and some obligations of confidence are protected. The relationships which equity protects are known as ‘fiduciary relationships’. A relationship of trust and confidence will be recognised as fiduciary where it arises from F (fiduciary) undertaking to act in the interests of B (beneficiary) in a matter which confers a discretion on F, and in respect of which the exercise of discretion affects B’s economic interests. B may hand over property to F, such as an investor handing over money to an investment adviser. A settlor may hand property to F to hold on trust for B. Alternatively, B may entrust F with the task of negotiating a contract on behalf of B so that F is B’s agent. Or F may be entrusted with the task of obtaining information on behalf of B which will enable B to exploit a commercial opportunity. This is also an example of agency.
What legitimates constitutions? One standard answer is that constitutions are legitimate only if they represent the people they govern. This article identifies two different conceptions of representation. Representation can be grounded either in the consent or the will of the citizens or when the constitution reflects the ‘real’ identity of the members of the nation. Alternatively, it is sometimes stated that the constitution is legitimate because it promotes justice or, more generally, is grounded in reason. While constitutions are typically grounded both in claims to represent the people and in claims concerning the justness and wisdom of the constitutional provisions, we establish that there are two types of constitutions: constitutions that are primarily representational (e.g. the US Constitution) and constitutions that are primarily reason-based (e.g. the German Constitution). We also show that this distinction has important ramifications for how constitutions are drafted and ratified, and how they operate. One central implication is that the legitimacy of constitutions that make weak claims to representation – for example, constitutions that are imposed by foreign powers – can still be defended on reason-based grounds.
Expressly political literature in the period of the Revolution and early republic attempts to balance, synthesize, or overcome the contradiction between the language of universal freedom and the nascent and evolving national institutions of domination, exploitation, and general unfreedom. In the early republic’s modern, specifically capitalist form of national law, the literary vehicle is inseparable from the emergent institutional form, and this essay argues that the early republic thus initiates a considerably new phase in the nexus of rhetorical expression and social power. Through readings of the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution, and key texts from the ratification debate, the essay traces the invention of a state machinery uniquely suited not primarily to overt domination over citizen-subjects, but rather to their exploitation by private actors formally extrinsic to the state – an apparatus writ small, in the grammar, syntax, and distinctive diction of the primary political texts.
This chapter focuses on the rules set out in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT). The chapter begins with the concept of a treaty, before discussing treatymaking, with a particular focus on the conclusion of treaties, their entry into force, and reservations to treaties. The chapter then delves into how treaties operate -- namely, their scope of application and their interpretation. Finally, this chapter looks at the invalidity, suspension, and termination of treaties.
This chapter focuses on the rules set out in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT). The chapter begins with the concept of a treaty, before discussing treatymaking, with a particular focus on the conclusion of treaties, their entry into force, and reservations to treaties. The chapter then delves into how treaties operate -- namely, their scope of application and their interpretation. Finally, this chapter looks at the invalidity, suspension, and termination of treaties.
International law depends on foreign relations law not only to establish the means by which states can consent to treaty obligations, but also the means to fulfill any resulting obligations, including by incorporating treaties into domestic law. Given that, the professed indifference of international law towards it—as toward other forms of domestic law—is puzzling. It is also misleading. As is widely evident, international affairs create an opportunity for certain domestic actors, usually executives, to assume additional authority. Less obviously, international law, reflected in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT), actually influences foreign relations law relating to the creation and elimination of international treaty obligations – encouraging even those states that possess other constitutional agents to regard executive power as sufficient. The homogenizing effects of particular international law rules is an important complement to the study of comparative foreign relations law.