Chapter 6 Limitations to the Exercise of Civil Jurisdiction in Areas Other Than Reparation for International Crimes

In: Universal Civil Jurisdiction
Author:
Fabrizio Marongiu Buonaiuti
Search for other papers by Fabrizio Marongiu Buonaiuti in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close

Purchase instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):

$40.00

Abstract

The extent of the jurisdictional power of States has been disputed since the 1927 pcij decision in the Lotus case. Two doctrinal approaches hence emerged and consolidated: one embracing the Court’s position, and underlying the inherent and unbridled nature of States’ jurisdiction; the other positing that States’ jurisdiction is not innate but rather granted to States by international law. According to the latter view, a permissive norm under international law would be required for a State to exercise extraterritorial jurisdiction. Nearly a century later, not much seems to have changed. The legitimacy of exorbitant fora provided by national legal orders, however tempered by judicial self-restraint, is still debated. The ECtHR decision in the Naït-Liman case yet confirms this assessment.

  • Collapse
  • Expand