State succession — Treaties — Joint Declaration of Government of the People’s Republic of China and Government of the Portuguese Republic on question of Macau, 1987 — People’s Republic of China (“PRC”) assuming sovereignty over Macau from 20 December 1999 — Application of PRC’s treaties to Macau after assumption of sovereignty — Rights of third parties

Treaties — Interpretation — Application — Agreement between Government of the People’s Republic of China and Government of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic concerning the encouragement and reciprocal protection of investments, 1993 (“the PRC–Laos BIT”) — Whether PRC–Laos BIT applying to Macau — “Moving treaty frontier” rule — Vienna Convention on the Succession of States in respect of Treaties, 1978, Article 15 — Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969, Article 29 — Exceptions — Whether a different intention appearing from treaty — Whether otherwise established that treaty was not meant to apply to Macau — Applicable standard of proof to be met under international law — Applicability of critical date doctrine to court’s assessment of evidence

Arbitration — Jurisdiction — Whether arbitral tribunal possessing jurisdiction to hear claims — Whether protection of PRC–Laos BIT extending to Macanese investors — Whether subject matter of claim falling within scope of dispute resolution clause in Article 8(3) of PRC–Laos BIT — Jurisdiction — Whether interpretation and application of PRC–Laos BIT justiciable before Singaporean courts — Jurisdiction — Standard of review — Whether Singaporean courts obliged to accord special deference to tribunal’s findings

Economics, trade and finance — Bilateral investment treaties — PRC–Laos BIT — People’s Republic of China assuming sovereignty over Macau from 20 December 1999 — Whether PRC–Laos BIT applying to Macau — Whether protection of PRC–Laos BIT extending to Macanese investors — Whether interpretation and application of PRC–Laos BIT justiciable before Singaporean courts — The law of Singapore

Human rights — Nature and scope of human rights treaties — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Article 1 — Duty of parties to secure the rights and freedoms under the Convention to persons within their jurisdiction — Extent of jurisdiction — Persons outside the territory of a Contracting State — Whether within its jurisdiction — Jurisdiction essentially territorial and extraterritorial applications requiring special justification — Whether British soldiers on military service in Iraq within jurisdiction of United Kingdom — Whether Human Rights Act 1998 applicable — Whether British soldiers entitled to rely on Article 2 of European Convention — Whether inquest into death of British soldier having to satisfy procedural requirements of Article 2 of European Convention

Jurisdiction — Concept of jurisdiction in international law — Jurisdiction primarily territorial — Circumstances in which jurisdiction of State extending beyond its borders — Effective control over area — Jurisdiction on basis of exercisable authority over individual — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Article 1 — British soldiers on military service in Iraq — Whether within jurisdiction of United Kingdom for purposes of Article 1 of European Convention — Domestic jurisprudence — Strasbourg jurisprudence

Treaties — Interpretation — Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969 — Applicability to interpretation of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Scope of European Convention — Meaning of phrase “within their jurisdiction” in Article 1 of European Convention — Travaux préparatoires — Whether Article 1 of European Convention to be interpreted as “living instrument” — Ratification of European Convention by United Kingdom — United Kingdom’s obligations towards armed forces abroad — Whether British soldiers operating in Iraq entitled to rely on Article 2 of European Convention

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Human Rights Act 1998 giving domestic effect to European Convention — Section 6(1) of Act — Whether Act applicable — Article 2 of European Convention scheduled to Act — Whether British soldiers operating in Iraq entitled to rely on Article 2 of European Convention — Purpose of Act — Jurisdictional scope of Act — Jurisdictional scope of European Convention — Whether inquest having to satisfy procedural requirements of alleged breach of Article 2 of European Convention

War and armed conflict — Invasion of Iraq — United Kingdom forces in Iraq — Legal position — Consent of territorial sovereign — Coalition Provisional Authority — Occupation — Belligerent occupation — Effective control of territory — Relationship between United Kingdom and its armed forces — Territorial jurisdiction — Personal jurisdiction — Whether British soldiers serving in Iraq within jurisdiction of United Kingdom at all times for purposes of Article 1 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Whether United Kingdom owing Article 2 obligations to its soldiers serving overseas

Human rights — Right to life — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Article 2 — Whether inquest having to satisfy procedural requirements of Article 2 — Whether systemic failure on part of State — Scope of investigation — Whether State having responsibility to carry out effective investigation into death of British soldier — Whether death of every British soldier on active service requiring Article 2 investigation — The law of England

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — Effect in municipal law — National legislation implementing treaties — Interpretation — Legislation not implementing all provisions of relevant article of Treaty — Presumption that Congress intended to legislate in a manner which fulfilled treaty obligations of the United States

Jurisdiction — Principles — Territorial principle — Protective principle — Nationality principle — Passive personality principle — Extraterritorial jurisdiction — Presumption against extraterritorial effect of legislation — Whether extraterritorial jurisdiction can be inferred from statute

Treaties — Effect in municipal law — Implementing legislation — United States legislation implementing the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, 1973, Article 3 — Legislation not implementing all provisions of relevant article of Treaty — The law of the United States

Aliens — Refugees — Refugee status — United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951 — Interpretation and application of Article 1F(b) — Exception in event of “serious non-political crime” — Bombing of business premises of supporters of present government — Killing and injuring of innocent bystanders — Whether constituting serious non-political crime — Incidence test — Whether crimes being executed in context of violent opposition to government — Whether real nexus between crime and political objective — Whether means being employed proportionate to political objective pursued — The law of Canada

State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Waiver of immunity — Interpretation — Nature or purpose of activity — North Atlantic Treaty Status of Forces Agreement, 1951 — United States naval base — Employment of Canadian civilians — Certification proceedings — Whether commercial activity — Whether United States had waived immunity — Requirement of explicit waiver — The law of Canada

International Court of Justice — Contentious Procedure — Evidence — Burden of Proof — Probative Value of Admissions of Title.

State Territory — Acquisition of and Title to — Proof of Title — Burden of Proof — “Critical Date” in respect of Evidence of Title — Manifestations of Exercise of Sovereignty as Element in Opposing Claims to Sovereignty — Assessment of Relative Value of Manifestations of Exercise of Sovereignty — Admission of Title — Probative Value of.

State Succession — Succession to Liabilities — Administrative Debts — Debts Contracted in Connection with the Prosecution of War — German East Africa — Articles 119, 120 and 257 of the Treaty of Versailles.

Extradition — Conditions of — Extradition in Absence of Treaty.

State territory — In general — Acquisition of territorial sovereignty — Conquest and annexation — Situation of place “abroad” — Extension of law, jurisdiction and administration to territory — Whether application of foreign law to territory is annexation — Status of East Jerusalem — The law of Israel

Sovereign immunity — Foreign States and their property — Contract of employment — Termination of — Austrian university professor employed by the Republic of Indonesia — Whether claim can be brought in Austrian courts — Immunity from jurisdiction — Whether conclusion of contract an act iure gestionis — Attachment of bank deposits — Whether Indonesian State entitled to immunity from attachment — Whether purpose of funds over which attachment sought is relevant — The law of Austria

Human rights — Prohibition of torture — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950, Article 3 — Whether applicants facing real risk of treatment proscribed by Article 3 in Uzbekistan — Evidence — Assessment at date of extradition — Turkey failing to comply with interim measure indicated under Rule 39 — Court being prevented from assessing risk in appropriate manner — Whether Turkey violating Article 3

Human rights — Right to fair trial — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950, Article 6(1) — Whether applying to extradition proceedings in Turkey — Whether violation of Article 6(1) concerning criminal proceedings in Uzbekistan — Whether risk of flagrant denial of justice — Evidence at time of extradition — Unavailability of additional information — Turkey failing to comply with indication — Whether Turkey violating Article 6(1)

Human rights — Right of individual application — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950, Article 34 — Turkey failing to comply with measures indicated under Rule 39 of Rules of Court — Whether Turkey breaching its Article 34 undertaking not to hinder applicants in exercise of right of individual application

International tribunals — Interim measures — Scope — Whether binding — Convention system — General principles of international law — Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969 — Relevant international case law — European Court of Human Rights, Rule 39 of Rules of Court

Naturalisation — When Taking Place in British Self-Governing Dominion — Local Operation — Person Naturalised in Australia in 1908 not a British Subject in England.

Jurisdiction — Territorial Limits of — Foreign Confiscatory Legislation — The Law of France.

Recognition of Acts of Foreign States — Foreign Confiscatory Legislation — Extraterritorial Effect of — The Law of France.

Act of State — International Bodies — Reparation Commission — Legal Status of the French Agents of the Commission — Lack of Competence of the French Courts

States as international persons — Sovereignty and independence — Conclusiveness of statements of Executive — As to status of territory — Protectorate of Northern Rhodesia — Whether foreign territory for purpose of issue of writ of habeas corpus by, English High Court.

Jurisdiction — Territorial limits of — Jurisdiction of English High Court to issue writ of habeas corpus into protectorate — Whether writ will issue to protect British national in foreign State — Trespass on sovereignty of foreign State — Principle of effectiveness.

States as international persons — Dependent States — Protectorates — Relationship to protecting State — Northern Rhodesia — Whether a “foreign dominion” of British Crown — Whether foreign territory for purpose of issue of writ of habeas corpus by English High Court — Sovereignty — Divisibility of — Variable nature of protectorates — Compared with colony or territory acquired by conquest.

International law — Relation to Municipal law — Whether courts will examine validity under international law of public act of foreign sovereign committed within own territory expropriating foreign property without adequate compensation — Competence of municipal courts to determine and apply international law Nature of customary international law standard governing State's responsibility for taking of foreign property without adequate compensation — Act of State doctrine — Nature of and policies underlying — Applicability of doctrine when foreign State's acts alleged to violate customary international law — International law as understood by courts in United States — The law of the United States of America.

Jurisdiction — Territorial — Expropriation of alien property — Expropriation by Cuba of sugar properties within Cuba indirectly owned by United States residents — Challenge to validity of expropriation in United States court — Action by Cuban governmental instrumentality to recover value of such properties after alleged conversion of sugar in United States — Whether expropriation in violation of customary international law — Relevance of failure of Cuba to pay adequate compensation — Relevance of retaliatory purpose of expropriation and discriminatory application to United States citizens — Nature of customary international law standard governing State's responsibility for taking of foreign property without adequate compensation — Application of Act of State doctrine in United States courts — International law as understood by courts in United States — The law of the United States of America.

Recognition of acts of foreign States and Governments — Expropriation of foreign-owned property situate within expropriating State — Expropriation by Cuba of sugar properties indirectly owned by United States residents — Suit by Cuban governmental instrumentality in United States Court to recover value of properties after alleged conversion of sugar in United States — Whether Court can examine validity of expropriation to determine whether instrumentality acquired title to sugar properties — Act of State doctrine — Nature of and policies underlying — Applicability of doctrine when foreign State's acts alleged to violate customary international law — Nature of customary international standard governing State's responsibility for taking of foreign property without adequate compensation — Whether recognized foreign Government may resort to United States courts — International law as understood by courts in United States — The law of the United States of America.

Treaties — Special kinds of — Carriage by air — Warsaw Convention, 1929 — Place where action for damages resulting from international flight may be brought — Interpretation by courts of United States of America.

Treaties — Interpretation of — Principles and rules of interpretation — Liberal interpretation in view of purpose of treaty — Warsaw Convention on International Air Transport, 1929 — Where action must be brought — Interpretation by courts of United States of America.

Jurisdiction of Mixed Tribunals — Questions of Personal Status — Foreign States before Mixed Tribunals — Implied Waiver of Immunity — Territoriality of Fiscal Laws — Execution of Consular Orders in Egypt.

International organizations — Immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Nature and scope — Waiver of immunity — Employment dispute — World Bank — Waiver of immunity contained in World Bank’s Articles of Agreement — Whether constituting a waiver of immunity with regard to employment disputes — Principle that international organization only waiving immunity if waiver helping organization to fulfil its purpose — Whether waiver of immunity with regard to employment disputes helping World Bank to fulfil its purpose — United States International Organizations Immunities Act 1945 — The law of the United States

International Law — Relation to Municipal Law — Treaties — Necessity of Municipal Legislation.

War — Effects on Enemy Property — Vesting of Enemy Property — Situs of Debt.

Treaties — Operation of — Peace Treaty — Whether Legislation required to Bring into Effect in Canada — Treaty of Versailles, 1919 — Vesting of Enemy Property — Situs of Debt.