Chapter 3 analyzes freedom as doing “whatever one wishes” in fourth-century oratory. As several scholars have noted, doing “whatever one wishes” appears ambivalent in forensic speeches. They argue that, since Athens was not an anarchic state, extreme freedom could be glossed as a threat to sociopolitical stability. In contrast to prevailing scholarship, however, I argue that the most dominant principle, even in these texts, is the preservation of positive freedom as justification for the litigant’s position. While acting “however one wishes” may be presented as objectionable, the rhetoric of that assessment emphasizes who is doing “whatever they wish” and whom they affect by doing so. Bad characters, whether a criminals, oligarchs, or metics, can be rebuked as undeserving of positive freedom and abusing the power that attends it. The limitation of another citizen’s ability to do what he wishes can also condemn the action. Doing “what one wishes” is not a byword for antidemocratic action, but can have such a connotation because of the particular actors or victims of the actions. It is the misuse of the natural qualities of a citizen that leads to censure.

In this chapter, Daniel Franchini and Russell Buchan examine the status, nature, content, and scope of the obligation of peaceful dispute settlement. This chapter traces the emergence of this obligation under customary and conventional international law, analyses the conditions that trigger its engagement, and explores what measures disputants must take in order to discharge this obligation. This chapter maintains that the peaceful settlement obligation is an interstitial norm insofar as it influences the interpretation and application of other rules of international law relevant to the peaceful settlement of disputes.

Chapter 5 turns from the demography of the Court of Requests to the issues that its plaintiffs presented. It begins with a breakdown of the subject matter of petitions, including violent assaults, debt and goods disputes, and quarrels over the possession of land. Thereafter, the chapter abandons firm legal categorisations used in other single-court studies, observing that supplicants to the king more often framed their cases in terms of emotions, relationships, and social values – of personal status and a wider social order that they perceived to be at risk. Finally, the chapter examines claims made by Requests’ petitioners about their inability to find justice elsewhere, in other parts of the legal system. This serves to trace the various possible steps between the onset of a localised feud and the pursuit of litigation before the king, and therefore to better contextualise the Court of Requests and the conciliar justice network. It also demonstrates how subjects and supplicants perceived this new jurisdiction: not as a forum for trying particular areas of case law but as a mechanism for remedying tangled feuds that could not be so simply defined nor easily remedied elsewhere.

This chapter addresses the Court’s jurisdiction in contentious cases and its jurisdiction in advisory opinions, using specific examples from the Court’s judgments and opinions. It considers whether a novel approach is needed to confer on the Court compulsory jurisdiction across a wider range of disputes.

Chapter 14 covers the provision on dispute settlement and consultations in the Agreement on Safeguards. This provision follows the general dispute settlement rules and procedures contained in the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding and Articles XXII and XXIII of the GATT 1994. It is technically the legal basis for the handling of disputes on the application of the Agreement on Safeguards. Chapter 14 explains how the dispute settlement process operates at its different stages and the usual issues that arise in the conduct of safeguard disputes. The chapter also provides statistics on the performance of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism in respect of safeguard investigations and safeguard measures. It provides practical considerations derived from the experience of the author as an active litigant in dispute settlement proceedings.

The multilateral proposed changes require significant infrastructural changes to the existing tax framework. How should such changes be implemented? Some changes are required at both the domestic law level and in the public international law arena of double taxation treaties. Other changes can be made in one or other of these fields of law (domestic or international). What other matters need to be addressed? There are many questions in the area of implementation, such as dispute resolution and dispute prevention, calculation and collection of tax, use of multilateral instruments, and the prevention of double taxation.

The multilateral proposed changes require significant infrastructural changes to the existing tax framework. How should such changes be implemented? Some changes are required at both the domestic law level and in the public international law arena of double taxation treaties. Other changes can be made in one or other of these fields of law (domestic or international). What other matters need to be addressed? There are many questions in the area of implementation, such as dispute resolution and dispute prevention, calculation and collection of tax, use of multilateral instruments, and the prevention of double taxation.

Diderot and Rousseau were friends and then enemies, and they were also both major writers of the Enlightenment. They argued that human nature should be understood and valued, and they argued against anything that constrained it, as they considered that all suffering was destructive. Fiction was part of their argumentative arsenal, and perhaps even the tool they felt was most effective, as it works through the imagination on the emotions. 'Natural' reactions of dismay or distress at injustice or cruelty could 'enlighten' the reader at an emotional and therefore natural level, and create new ways of seeing that rejected harsh convention and promoted natural morality. This chapter tracks these aspects through their fictional and non-fictional works, showing how central they are to all their writing. We also look at the friendship of these two writers, and at the publication history of their fictional work.