No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 March 2017
* Both items relating to Settlement of Disputes in this issue of the Journal have been written by Ernesto J. Sanchez, a member of the American Society of International Law and law clerk at the U.S. Court of Federal Claims in Washington, D.C. All views expressed in these items are the author’s and in no way reflect those of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims or its staff. The Editor of this section, who served as an arbitrator in one of the cases discussed by Mr. Sanchez, gratefully acknowledges his role in taking responsibility for these items.
1 See Chi, Carmody, Case Report: Softwood Lumber Dispute (2001–2006), 100 AJIL 664 (2006)Google Scholar; John R., Crook, Contemporary Practice of the United States, 99 AJIL 272 (2005)Google Scholar, 100 AJIL 242, 243, & 702 (2006); John R., Crook, The 2005 Activity of the NAFTA Tribunals, 100 AJIL 429 (2006)Google Scholar.
2 Canfor Corp. v. United States, Decision on Preliminary Question (NAFTA Ch. 11 Arb. Trib. June 6, 2006), at <http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/67753.pdf>.
3 John R., Crook, Contemporary Practice of the United States, 100 AJIL 722 (2006)Google Scholar.
4 John R., Crook, Contemporary Practice of the United States, 100 AJIL 243 (2006)Google Scholar.
5 Canfor Corp. v. United States at 104.
6 Id. at 112.
7 Id. at 159–60 (footnote omitted).