Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.596968
Title: A common law of international adjudication
Author: Brown, C. W.
Awarding Body: University of Cambridge
Current Institution: University of Cambridge
Date of Award: 2005
Availability of Full Text:
Full text unavailable from EThOS. Please contact the current institution’s library for further details.
Abstract:
This dissertation examines aspects of procedure and remedies in the jurisprudence of international courts and tribunals. The dissertation’s central thesis is that there is increasing similarity in the application of procedure and remedies by international courts, and that this represents the emergence of a ‘common law of international adjudication’. The emerging common law of international adjudication owes its existence in part to the broad powers that international courts can exercise over their procedure and remedies. These powers encompass not only those which are expressly conferred on them, but also inherent powers, which international courts can exercise to fill lacunae in their constitutive instruments and rules of procedure. Several specific aspects of the adjudication process are examined to discern the existence of commonality in international judicial practice. These are: aspects of the rules of evidence; the power to grant provisional measures; the power to interpret and revise judgements and awards; and the availability of remedies. The analysis suggests that international courts are increasingly referring to the practice of other international tribunals, leading to substantial commonality on each of these questions, except where their constitutive instruments provide for special rules. The thesis developed in this dissertation has practical and theoretical implications. While it has not been possible to consider all aspects of international adjudication, the analysis nonetheless suggests that similar results may be found in other areas, and that international courts can devise common approaches to new procedural issues. It also suggests that international courts do not operate as self-contained regimes, but rather regard themselves as forming part of a community of international courts. In this sense, the emergence of a common law of international adjudication has positive implications for the development of an international legal system.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.596968  DOI: Not available
Share: