Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T06:51:50.838Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Public International Law—Foreign Legislation Enacted in Violation of International Law—Effect in England

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2009

H. Lauterpacht
Get access

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Case and Comment
Information
The Cambridge Law Journal , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , April 1954 , pp. 20 - 22
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge Law Journal and Contributors 1954

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Sa Haile Selasse v. Cable and Wireless Ltd. (No. 2) [1929] Ch.D. at pp. 187–194. And see Sir Arnold McNair's observations on Bank of Ethiopia v. National Bank of Egypt and Liguori [1937] Ch. 513, in Legal Effects of War 3rd ed., 1948, pp. 340–343.

2 See the qualifying statement by Russell, L.J. in Princess Olga Paley v. Weisz [1929]Google Scholar 1 K.B. at p. 736. A number of American cases take that qualification into account. But see McNair, op. cit., p. 362.

3 Underhill v. Hernandez (1897) 168 U.S. 250; Oetjen v. Central Leather Co. (1917) 246 U.S. 397; Ricaud v. American Metal Co. (1917) 246 U.S. 304.

4 See case cited by Sir Arnold McNair, loc. cit., and Fachiri, in British Year Book of International Law, 12 (1931) pp. 101–104.Google Scholar