Pub Date : 2019-08-01DOI: 10.5771/9783845299167-239
B. Hess, M. R. Isidro
The First World War was not only the greatest war mankind had experienced to that point in history, it also triggered many adverse consequences for private commerce and investment. In the course of the war, all belligerent nations adopted legislative measures against the so-called property of enemies.1 According to these measures, trading with enemy nationals was generally prohibited, and any property of these nationals located in the belligerent state was strictly controlled and—often—seized. Measures of sequestration were usually applied to corporations and branches of foreign investors of the belligerent nations.2 As the nationals of enemy countries had been denied standing in the domestic courts, they faced default judgChapter 11
{"title":"Chapter 11 International Adjudication of Private Rights: The Mixed Arbitral Tribunals in the Peace Treaties of 1919–1922","authors":"B. Hess, M. R. Isidro","doi":"10.5771/9783845299167-239","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845299167-239","url":null,"abstract":"The First World War was not only the greatest war mankind had experienced to that point in history, it also triggered many adverse consequences for private commerce and investment. In the course of the war, all belligerent nations adopted legislative measures against the so-called property of enemies.1 According to these measures, trading with enemy nationals was generally prohibited, and any property of these nationals located in the belligerent state was strictly controlled and—often—seized. Measures of sequestration were usually applied to corporations and branches of foreign investors of the belligerent nations.2 As the nationals of enemy countries had been denied standing in the domestic courts, they faced default judgChapter 11","PeriodicalId":431930,"journal":{"name":"Peace Through Law","volume":"101 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130111980","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-03-25DOI: 10.5771/9783845299167-277
M. Erpelding
On 20 March 1921, French tanks and infantrymen could be seen patrolling the streets of Kattowitz—or Katowice, as it was known to its Polish-speaking inhabitants—in Upper Silesia.1 The troops were part of a multinational force comprising up to 20,000 British, French, and Italian soldiers under the command of French general Jules Gratier (1863–1956). They had been dispatched to Upper Silesia in February 1920 to keep the peace and guarantee the safety of the Inter-Allied Government and Plebiscite Commission of Upper Silesia based in Oppeln/Opole.2 Presided by another French general, Henri Le Rond (1864–1949), the Commission had been tasked with organizing a referendum of self-determination in parts of the region pursuant to article 88 Treaty of Versailles and the new principle of self-determination. In the meantime, it also replaced the German Reich and the Prussian State in administering the plebiscite area.3 This made Upper Silesia Chapter 12
1921年3月20日，可以看到法国坦克和步兵在上西里西亚的卡托维茨(波兰语居民称之为卡托维兹)的街道上巡逻。1这些部队是由法国将军儒勒·格拉提耶(1863-1956)指挥的由多达2万名英国、法国和意大利士兵组成的多国部队的一部分。他们于1920年2月被派往上西里西亚，以维持和平并保证设在奥佩伦/奥波尔的上西里西亚联盟间政府和公民投票委员会的安全委员会由另一位法国将军亨利·勒朗(Henri Le roud, 1864-1949年)主持，其任务是根据《凡尔赛条约》第88条和新的自决原则，在该区域部分地区组织一次自决公民投票。同时，它也取代德意志帝国和普鲁士国管理公民投票地区这就是《上西里西亚》第十二章
{"title":"Chapter 12 Local International Adjudication: The Groundbreaking ‘Experiment’ of the Arbitral Tribunal for Upper Silesia","authors":"M. Erpelding","doi":"10.5771/9783845299167-277","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845299167-277","url":null,"abstract":"On 20 March 1921, French tanks and infantrymen could be seen patrolling the streets of Kattowitz—or Katowice, as it was known to its Polish-speaking inhabitants—in Upper Silesia.1 The troops were part of a multinational force comprising up to 20,000 British, French, and Italian soldiers under the command of French general Jules Gratier (1863–1956). They had been dispatched to Upper Silesia in February 1920 to keep the peace and guarantee the safety of the Inter-Allied Government and Plebiscite Commission of Upper Silesia based in Oppeln/Opole.2 Presided by another French general, Henri Le Rond (1864–1949), the Commission had been tasked with organizing a referendum of self-determination in parts of the region pursuant to article 88 Treaty of Versailles and the new principle of self-determination. In the meantime, it also replaced the German Reich and the Prussian State in administering the plebiscite area.3 This made Upper Silesia Chapter 12","PeriodicalId":431930,"journal":{"name":"Peace Through Law","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124276239","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-03-25DOI: 10.5771/9783845299167-157
G. Sinclair
{"title":"Chapter 6 Managing the ‘Workers Threat’: Preventing Revolution Through the International Labour Organization","authors":"G. Sinclair","doi":"10.5771/9783845299167-157","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845299167-157","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":431930,"journal":{"name":"Peace Through Law","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122623498","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-03-25DOI: 10.5771/9783845299167-183
Herbert Kronke
As is obvious from the title, the term ‘private international law’ is not intended to be synonymous with ‘conflict of laws’ but, in the North American tradition, as the entirety of international law not relating to state-tostate relationships. It is clear that World War I and its aftermath mark key moments in the development of organized and institutionalized research in the fields of comparative law, conflict of laws, the law of dispute resolution and transnational commercial law. To a varying extent they were driven by economic expansion and rivalry, the war and, following its catastrophic outcome, the quest for peace. For many post-WWI lawyers, one of the main functions of harmonized law was to build and maintain this peace by fostering an orderly and universally beneficial commercial exchange. As I used to tell visitors, this historic peace-making and peacebuilding function is still an integral part of UNIDROIT’s present-day mission. Within this historical development, the years 1916 and 1926 are particularly significant. The former sees the founding of the first two academic institutions with staff and funding devoted exclusively to private international law, that is, the institutes affiliated with the universities in Heidelberg and Munich. In 1926, at the national level, the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute in Berlin (now Max Planck Institute for Comparative Law and Private International Law in Hamburg) and, at the international level, the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT) in Rome see the light of the day. The—explicit or implicit—objectives of these institutions differed widely. In the deed of trust of the Heidelberg institute, its founder, the elder of the Berlin merchants Carl Leopold Netter, expressed the desire ‘to testify that, even in times of war, the work for peace is not forgotten’ . Consequently, the aim of that institute was to fund research and Chapter 7
从标题中可以明显看出，“国际私法”一词并不是要与“法律冲突”同义，而是在北美传统中，作为与国与国关系无关的国际法的整体。很明显，第一次世界大战及其后果标志着比较法、法律冲突、争端解决法和跨国商法领域有组织和制度化研究发展的关键时刻。它们在不同程度上受到经济扩张和竞争、战争以及在其灾难性后果之后对和平的追求的推动。对于许多二战后的律师来说，协调法的主要功能之一是通过促进有序和普遍有益的商业交流来建立和维护这种和平。正如我过去常常告诉来访者的那样，这一历史性的缔造和平和建设和平职能仍然是通法社目前使命的一个组成部分。在这一历史发展中，1916年和1926年尤为重要。在前者看来，成立了最初的两个学术机构，其工作人员和经费专门用于国际私法，即附属于海德堡和慕尼黑两所大学的研究所。1926年，在国家层面上，柏林的凯撒威廉研究所(现为汉堡的马克斯普朗克比较法和国际私法研究所)和国际层面上，罗马的国际统一私法研究所(UNIDROIT)看到了曙光。这些机构的显性或隐性目标差别很大。在海德堡研究所的信托契约中，它的创始人、柏林商人卡尔·利奥波德·内特(Carl Leopold Netter)的长者表达了“即使在战争时期，也不会忘记和平的努力”的愿望。因此，该研究所的目的是资助研究和第七章
{"title":"Chapter 7 The Role of Private International Law: UNIDROIT and the Geneva Conventions on Arbitration","authors":"Herbert Kronke","doi":"10.5771/9783845299167-183","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845299167-183","url":null,"abstract":"As is obvious from the title, the term ‘private international law’ is not intended to be synonymous with ‘conflict of laws’ but, in the North American tradition, as the entirety of international law not relating to state-tostate relationships. It is clear that World War I and its aftermath mark key moments in the development of organized and institutionalized research in the fields of comparative law, conflict of laws, the law of dispute resolution and transnational commercial law. To a varying extent they were driven by economic expansion and rivalry, the war and, following its catastrophic outcome, the quest for peace. For many post-WWI lawyers, one of the main functions of harmonized law was to build and maintain this peace by fostering an orderly and universally beneficial commercial exchange. As I used to tell visitors, this historic peace-making and peacebuilding function is still an integral part of UNIDROIT’s present-day mission. Within this historical development, the years 1916 and 1926 are particularly significant. The former sees the founding of the first two academic institutions with staff and funding devoted exclusively to private international law, that is, the institutes affiliated with the universities in Heidelberg and Munich. In 1926, at the national level, the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute in Berlin (now Max Planck Institute for Comparative Law and Private International Law in Hamburg) and, at the international level, the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT) in Rome see the light of the day. The—explicit or implicit—objectives of these institutions differed widely. In the deed of trust of the Heidelberg institute, its founder, the elder of the Berlin merchants Carl Leopold Netter, expressed the desire ‘to testify that, even in times of war, the work for peace is not forgotten’ . Consequently, the aim of that institute was to fund research and Chapter 7","PeriodicalId":431930,"journal":{"name":"Peace Through Law","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121188350","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.5771/9783845299167-29
Nathaniel Berman
{"title":"Chapter 1 Drama Through Law: The Versailles Treaty and the Casting of the Modern International Stage","authors":"Nathaniel Berman","doi":"10.5771/9783845299167-29","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845299167-29","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":431930,"journal":{"name":"Peace Through Law","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123938460","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.5771/9783845299167-205
Pierre D'argent
{"title":"Chapter 9 The Conversion of Reparations into Sovereign Debts (1920–1953)","authors":"Pierre D'argent","doi":"10.5771/9783845299167-205","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845299167-205","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":431930,"journal":{"name":"Peace Through Law","volume":"302 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122722759","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis","authors":"","doi":"10.5771/9783845299167-1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845299167-1","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":431930,"journal":{"name":"Peace Through Law","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128461649","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.5771/9783845299167-123
León Castellanos-Jankiewicz
Although they are not considered the legacy precedents of human rights today, the interwar minorities treaties contributed to developing the legal standard of equality before the law, which would become the keystone of the international human rights regime after the Second World War. The minority protection standards were also the first international rights that were embedded in an international organization. This regime is therefore useful in providing us with an understanding of the origins of later human rights treaties, since the notion of equality they contained is not dissimilar to that outlined in the Universal Declaration and subsequent international instruments of a binding nature.1 This chapter reviews the travaux préparatoires of the interwar minorities treaties, which reflect a broad concern for equality and non-discrimination. Its central proposition is that the international protection of minorities was primarily designed to develop a liberal-democratic agenda premised on equality before the law in order to allay the concerns of national minorities in Eastern Europe. This cause was supported by United States President Woodrow Wilson, whose democratic outlook set the tone of the 1919 Paris peace conference. The first section of the chapter begins by presenting the plight of minorities during the Great War and surveys the war aims of the Great Powers in relation to this problem. It emerges that minority protection was regarded as instrumental in achieving the Allied objectives of spreading democracy and fulfilling nationalist aspirations. The role of self-determination in reconciling the contradictions of these competing notions is also explained through a discussion of Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points and their connection to the protection of national minorities. Chapter 5
{"title":"Chapter 5 Negotiating Equality: Minority Protection in the Versailles Settlement","authors":"León Castellanos-Jankiewicz","doi":"10.5771/9783845299167-123","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845299167-123","url":null,"abstract":"Although they are not considered the legacy precedents of human rights today, the interwar minorities treaties contributed to developing the legal standard of equality before the law, which would become the keystone of the international human rights regime after the Second World War. The minority protection standards were also the first international rights that were embedded in an international organization. This regime is therefore useful in providing us with an understanding of the origins of later human rights treaties, since the notion of equality they contained is not dissimilar to that outlined in the Universal Declaration and subsequent international instruments of a binding nature.1 This chapter reviews the travaux préparatoires of the interwar minorities treaties, which reflect a broad concern for equality and non-discrimination. Its central proposition is that the international protection of minorities was primarily designed to develop a liberal-democratic agenda premised on equality before the law in order to allay the concerns of national minorities in Eastern Europe. This cause was supported by United States President Woodrow Wilson, whose democratic outlook set the tone of the 1919 Paris peace conference. The first section of the chapter begins by presenting the plight of minorities during the Great War and surveys the war aims of the Great Powers in relation to this problem. It emerges that minority protection was regarded as instrumental in achieving the Allied objectives of spreading democracy and fulfilling nationalist aspirations. The role of self-determination in reconciling the contradictions of these competing notions is also explained through a discussion of Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points and their connection to the protection of national minorities. Chapter 5","PeriodicalId":431930,"journal":{"name":"Peace Through Law","volume":"60 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125830140","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.5771/9783845299167-85
Michael D. Callahan
On 9 October 1934, King Alexander I of Yugoslavia was assassinated as he arrived in Marseilles to begin a state visit to France.1 Louis Barthou, the French foreign minister, was wounded during the chaos and died later. Evidence quickly established that anti-Yugoslav terrorist groups based in Italy and trained in Hungary had carried out the attack. The terrorists’ ultimate goal was to destabilize the multi-ethnic Yugoslavia and create new nation states. Much like the shooting of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand at Sarajevo twenty years before, Alexander’s murder sparked an international crisis that threatened the peace of Europe. France supported Yugoslavia; Italy the Hungarians. In the background were alliances and individual states interested in either defending or changing the European status quo. All the ingredients of the July Crisis of 1914 seemed suddenly there again. While these two terrorist attacks had important similarities, their repercussions were very different. According to its Covenant, the main purposes of the League of Nations were ‘to promote international co-operation and to achieve international peace and security.’2 These central aims were in fact accomplished in 1934, an achievement that represents the League at its most effective. With strong leadership from Britain and France, the League made it possible for states to adopt a unanimous resolution that preserved the peace that all sides wanted. During its successful mediation the League Council decided to confront the serious problem of international terrorism. Jurists and officials from several countries would spend nearly three years exploring ways to classify specific terrorist acts, and conspiracies to commit them, as international Chapter 3
{"title":"Chapter 3 Preventing a Repetition of the Great War: Responding to International Terrorism in the 1930s","authors":"Michael D. Callahan","doi":"10.5771/9783845299167-85","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845299167-85","url":null,"abstract":"On 9 October 1934, King Alexander I of Yugoslavia was assassinated as he arrived in Marseilles to begin a state visit to France.1 Louis Barthou, the French foreign minister, was wounded during the chaos and died later. Evidence quickly established that anti-Yugoslav terrorist groups based in Italy and trained in Hungary had carried out the attack. The terrorists’ ultimate goal was to destabilize the multi-ethnic Yugoslavia and create new nation states. Much like the shooting of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand at Sarajevo twenty years before, Alexander’s murder sparked an international crisis that threatened the peace of Europe. France supported Yugoslavia; Italy the Hungarians. In the background were alliances and individual states interested in either defending or changing the European status quo. All the ingredients of the July Crisis of 1914 seemed suddenly there again. While these two terrorist attacks had important similarities, their repercussions were very different. According to its Covenant, the main purposes of the League of Nations were ‘to promote international co-operation and to achieve international peace and security.’2 These central aims were in fact accomplished in 1934, an achievement that represents the League at its most effective. With strong leadership from Britain and France, the League made it possible for states to adopt a unanimous resolution that preserved the peace that all sides wanted. During its successful mediation the League Council decided to confront the serious problem of international terrorism. Jurists and officials from several countries would spend nearly three years exploring ways to classify specific terrorist acts, and conspiracies to commit them, as international Chapter 3","PeriodicalId":431930,"journal":{"name":"Peace Through Law","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130813345","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.5771/9783845299167-323
D. Boden
{"title":"Chapter 13 Resistance Through Law: Belgian Judges and the Relations Between Occupied State and Occupying Power","authors":"D. Boden","doi":"10.5771/9783845299167-323","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845299167-323","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":431930,"journal":{"name":"Peace Through Law","volume":"9 3","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"120848244","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：