International Canals — Suez Canal — Constantinople Convention, 1888 — Article tO — Measures Necessary for Safety and Defence of Egypt — Seizure of Goods which Strengthen War Effort of a Country at War with Egypt — The Law of Egypt — Egypt and Israel.

Contraband — Conception of — Goods Consigned to Enemy Territory — Goods which Strengthen War Effort of Enemy — Seizure at Suez — Constantinople Convention, 1888 — The Law of Egypt — Egypt and Israel

State responsibility — Claims — Nationality of — Defence of dual nationality for purposes of Treaty of Peace with Italy — Dominance of Italian nationality.

Nationality — Dual nationality — Defence of, for purposes of Treaty of Peace with Italy — Dominance of Italian nationality.

Disputes — Arbitration — By Conciliation Commission — Evidence — Sufficiency of — Generalities and self-serving declaration — Burden of proof — Establishing “treatment as enemy” — Clear and convincing proof.

British Commonwealth — Independent Members of — Pakistan Federation — Whether Entitled to Immunity from Jurisdiction of English Municipal Court.

Jurisdiction — Immunity from — Foreign States — Pakistan Federation — Contract Expressly Submitting to Jurisdiction — Immunity in relation to Commercial Contract.

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Conduct of foreign relations — Treaty-making power — United Kingdom — Whether exercise of treaty-making power subject to judicial review — Treaty on European Union, 1992 (“Maastricht Treaty”) — Extent to which Crown’s treaty-making power can be fettered by Parliament — European Communities Act 1972, Section 2(1) — European Parliamentary Elections Act 1978, Section 6 — European Communities (Amendment) Act 1993

Treaties — Effect in municipal law — Treaty on European Union, 1992 — Ratification by United Kingdom — Protocols — Whether ratification of Treaty automatically involving ratification of Protocols — Evidence from practice of other signatory States — European Communities (Amendment) Act 1993, Section 1(2)

Treaties — Conclusion and operation — Constitutional limitations — Treaty on European Union, 1992 — Protocol on social policy — Ratification by United Kingdom — Exclusion of applicability to United Kingdom by European Communities (Amendment) Act 1993, Section 1(2) — Possible indirect effect of Protocol under domestic law — Whether requiring parliamentary approval

Treaties — Conclusion and operation — Constitutional limitations — Treaty on European Union, 1992 — Extension of powers of European Community — Establishment of common foreign and security policy — Whether constituting abandonment or transfer of Crown’s prerogative powers — Whether requiring municipal legislation

International organizations — EEC — Powers — Institutions — Extension of powers by treaty — Treaty on European Union, 1992 — Protocol on social policy — Common foreign and security policy — The law of England

Human rights — Right to liberty — Internment without trial — Iraq — Whether internment compatible with European Convention on Human Rights, 1950, Article 5(1) — Authorization by the United Nations Security Council — Whether capable of displacing obligations under Article 5(1) — United Nations Charter Articles 24, 25 and 103 — Security Council Resolution 1546 (2004) — Whether authorizing internment — Whether imposing obligation to employ internment

Human rights — Scope of application — Requirement that individual be within the jurisdiction of the respondent State — European Convention on Human Rights, Article 1 — Military operations authorized by the United Nations Security Council — Iraq — Security Council Resolution 1546 (2004) — Whether actions of United Kingdom contingent in Multi-National Force attributable to United Kingdom or United Nations

International organizations — United Nations — Security Council — Duty to maintain international peace and security — Resolutions — Interpretation — Presumption that resolution not intended to oblige State to act inconsistently with human rights obligations — United Nations Charter Articles 24, 25 and 103 — Security Council Resolution 1546 (2004)

State responsibility — Armed forces — Armed forces of State taking part in Multi-National Force authorized by United Nations Security Council — Whether actions of members of force attributable to State or to the United Nations

War and armed conflict — Belligerent occupation — Iraq — Hague Regulations, 1907, Article 42 — Duty of occupying power to maintain order — Internment — Whether occupying power required to use internment if necessary

Jurisdictional Immunity — Foreign States — Set-Off.

Recognition of Governments — Retroactive Effect of — Confiscatory Decree by Government Subsequently Recognized — Effect of Decree on Assets Situate in Country According Recognition — Effect in Country Promulgating Confiscatory Decree — Right of Set-off — Sovereign Immunity.

State Succession — Private Rights — Merger of Indian States in Dominion of India — Legislation Abolishing Rights under Merger Agreements — Enforcement of Obligations Contained in Merger Agreements — Act of State — The Law of India.

War and neutrality — War in general — Definition — Patents Act 1949 — Hostilities with "any foreign state" — Whether including unrecognised State — Korean conflict — The law of England

Recognition — Of States and Governments — Non-recognition — Effects in municipal law — Patents — Extension of on grounds of war loss — Patents Act, 1949, section 24 — Hostilities with any “foreign state” — Whether including unrecognised states with defined territories and effective government in control — Status of North Korea — Whether question of fact for court — Whether Foreign Office certificate conclusive — The law of England

Environment — Conservation of natural heritage — UNESCO Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, 1972 — World Heritage List — Criteria for properties to be included — Obligation of States to identify and protect such properties — Exploration for minerals in northern Australia — Government decision to establish a “national park” — Government seeking inclusion of Stage 2 of park in World Heritage List — Whether affecting mining interests — Whether decision reviewable — World Heritage Properties Conservation Act 1983 (Commonwealth) — National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Amendment Act 1987 (Commonwealth)

Treaties — Treaty-making power of States — UNESCO Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, 1972 — Government of Australia acting to include property on World Heritage List — Mining interests in Northern Territory affected by decision — Whether exercise of treaty-making power prerogative of the Crown — Whether decision justiciable — World Heritage Properties Conservation Act 1983 (Commonwealth) — National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Amendment Act 1987 (Commonwealth) — The law of Australia

Human rights — Fair trial — Right to have witnesses examined — Conduct of trial — Delay — Appeal taking nearly two years — Delay of nearly four years between decision of the Court of Appeal and written statement of reasons for decision — Inhuman or degrading treatment — Death penalty — “Death row” phenomenon — Prolonged judicial proceedings for men under sentence of death — Whether constituting inhuman or degrading treatment — Stay of execution not notified to convicted persons until shortly before execution due to take place — International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966, Articles 7 and 14

International tribunals — Procedure — United Nations Human Rights Committee — Interim measures of protection — Request that execution not be carried out — Exhaustion of domestic remedies — Whether requirement to pursue appeal with little chance of success

Expropriation — Definition — Taking of property — Government interference with property — Whether capable of constituting expropriation — Whether formal act of nationalization required — Nature and extent of government interference — Appointment of temporary manager — Seizure of property by workers' organization — Whether encouraged or supported by government — Whether constituting expropriation

State responsibility — Acts of private individuals — Whether imputable to the State — Whether encouraged by government — Degree of government participation — Workers' organization — Iran-United States Claims Tribunal

Dependent States — The Philippines — Prior to Independence — Relationship to United States — Foreign Country vis-à-vis United States — Vessels Flying Philippine Flag — Exemption from Income Taxation by United States of Earnings of Such Vessels — The Law of the United States of America

Jurisdiction — Executive — Consequences of illegal arrest — Defendant detained in foreign country and returned to England — No attempt at extradition — Whether deportation from foreign country a disguised form of extradition — Whether circumstances of defendant’s return to England deprives English courts of jurisdiction — Whether courts possess discretion not to hear charges against defendant

Extradition — Conditions — Return of fugitive offender other than by extradition — Disguised extradition — The law of England

Treaties — Special kinds of — Most — favoured — nation clause — Effect of clause upon duty of forum to recognise status of adopted child conferred upon alien by foreign law — Public policy of forum — Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Navigation between Greece and United States, 1951 — The law of the United States of America.

Treaties — Interpretation of — Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Navigation between Greece and United States, 1951 — “Most-favoured-nation” clause — Effect of clause upon duty of forum to recognize status of adopted child conferred upon alien by foreign law — Public policy of forum — The law of the United States of America.

States as international persons — Sovereignty and independence — Conduct of foreign relations — Conclusiveness of statements of Executive — Inability of forum to apply foreign law made by persons not recognised by Executive as Government of independent State — Relevance of recognition of such laws by de jure sovereign of that country — Laws of Government of German Democratic Republic — Application by English court — Whether Government of German Democratic Republic acts as agent of U.S.S.R — The law of England.

States as international persons — Recognition — Of Governments Consequences of non — recognition — Application of laws of nonrecognized State in control of country not recognized as State by forum — Laws of Government of German Democratic Republic Application by English courts — Whether Government of German Democratic Republic acts as agent of U.S.S.R. — Relevance of status of U.S.S.R. as de jure sovereign — The law of England.

Warfare on land — Occupation of enemy territory — Legislative functions of Occupant — Delegation of legislative power — Germany — Position of authorities of U.S.S.R. — Status of German Democratic Republic.

States as international persons — Recognition — Of Governments — Consequences of non-recognition — Application of laws of non-recognized State in control of country not recognized as State by forum — Laws of Government of German Democratic Republic — Application by English courts — Whether Government of German Democratic Republic acts as agent of U.S.S.R. — Relevance of status of U.S.S.R. as de jure sovereign — The law of England.

Jurisdiction — Criminal Jurisdiction over Aliens — Crimes Committed Abroad — Crimes against the Safety of the State.

Aliens — Refugees — Unlawful presence in country of refuge — Whether a bar to granting of refugee status — Significance of failure to invoke refugee status immediately upon arrival in State of refuge — Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951, Article 31

Aliens — Asylum — Entitlement to — Procedure for claiming asylum — Requirement to claim asylum immediately upon entering State of refuge — Whether failure to do so constitutes a bar to subsequent claim — Requirement of well-founded reason for delay — Spanish Constitution 1978, Article 13(4) — Ministerial Orders concerning exercise of right of asylum — The law of Spain

Human rights — Jurisdiction — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — General duty of Contracting States under Article 1 of Convention — Abduction — Extraordinary rendition — Disappearance — Applicant complaining respondent State violating his rights under Articles 3, 5, 8, 10 and 13 of Convention — Preliminary objection raised by respondent State — Whether compliance with six-month time limit under Article 35(1) of Convention — Admissibility of complaints — Obligation of respondent State to ensure individuals within its jurisdiction not subjected to treatment in breach of Article 3 of Convention — Whether respondent State responsible for alleged ill-treatment of applicant by United States’ agents while applicant in respondent State — Respondent State transferring applicant into custody of United States’ authorities — Whether respondent State failing in obligation to assess whether real risk of ill-treatment contrary to Article 3 of Convention — Whether respondent State responsible for alleged ill-treatment of applicant while detained in Afghanistan — Whether respondent State responsible for applicant’s captivity in Afghanistan under Article 5 of Convention — Whether respondent State violating Articles 3, 5, 8, 13 and 10 of Convention

Evidence before international courts and tribunals — European Court of Human Rights — Assessment of evidence and establishment of facts — Standard of proof — Whether approach of national legal systems relevant — Role and approach of Court — Article 19 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Burden of proof — Case law under Articles 2 and 3 of Convention — Whether considerations applying to examination of disappearances under Article 5 of Convention — Allegations under Article 3 of Convention — Relevance of domestic proceedings and investigations — Whether burden of proof shifting to respondent Government — Whether respondent Government discharging burden — Whether applicant subjected to extraordinary rendition by agents of United States Central Intelligence Agency — Whether agents of respondent State assisting — Whether applicant’s allegations sufficiently convincing and established beyond reasonable doubt — Whether respondent State violating Articles 3, 5, 8, 13 and 10 of Convention

Human rights — Prohibition on torture and inhuman and degrading treatment — Article 3 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Allegations of ill-treatment by applicant — Admissibility of applicant’s complaints — Procedural aspect of Article 3 — Whether respondent State failing to carry out effective investigation of applicant’s allegations of ill-treatment — Substantive aspects of Article 3 — Whether derogation from Article 3 permitted in difficult circumstances of terrorism — Whether respondent State violating Article 3 on account of inhuman and degrading treatment of applicant in hotel — Whether respondent State responsible for ill-treatment of applicant at Skopje Airport — Whether treatment constituting torture — Responsibility of respondent State with regard to applicant’s transfer into custody of United States’ authorities despite real risk of further ill-treatment contrary to Article 3 — Whether respondent State violating Article 3 of Convention

Human rights — Right to liberty and security of person — Article 5 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Allegations of arbitrary detention by applicant — Whether respondent State violating Article 5 by its own agents and/or foreign agents operating in its territory and under its jurisdiction — Admissibility of applicant’s complaints — Substantive aspect of Article 5 — Whether applicant’s detention in respondent State in conformity with Article 5 requirements — Whether complying with domestic law — Whether applicant having access to representative of German embassy in respondent State — Article 36(1)(b) of Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, 1963 — Whether applicant’s subsequent detention in Afghanistan imputable to respondent State — Extraordinary rendition — Whether detention of terrorist suspects by United States’ authorities arbitrary — Whether real risk of flagrant violation of Article 5 rights if applicant handed over by Macedonian authorities to United States Central Intelligence Agency — Whether applicant’s abduction and detention amounting to enforced disappearance under international law — Procedural aspect of Article 5 — Whether effective investigation into applicant’s allegations of unlawful and arbitrary detention — Whether respondent State violating Article 5 of Convention

Human rights — Right to respect for private and family life — Article 8 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Applicant separated from family while abducted and detained — Admissibility of applicant’s complaint — Notion of private life — Whether covering person’s moral and physical integrity — Whether extending to situations of deprivation of liberty — Whether interference with applicant’s right in accordance with law — Whether respondent State violating Article 8 of Convention

Human rights — Right to an effective remedy — Article 13 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Applicant complaining of lack of effective remedy in respect of grievances under Articles 3, 5 and 8 of Convention — Admissibility of applicant’s complaints — Whether complaints arguable — Whether criminal investigation effective — Whether any other remedy effective — Requirements of Article 13 — Whether respondent State assessing risk of ill-treatment before transferring applicant to United States Central Intelligence Agency agents — Whether respondent State violating Article 13 of Convention

Consular relations — Right to consular access — Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, 1963, Article 36(1)(b) — Applicant’s detention in respondent State — Whether complying with Article 5 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Whether complying with domestic law — Whether complying with international law — Whether applicant having access to representative of German embassy in respondent State — Whether respondent State violating Article 5 of Convention

Terrorism — Investigation of terrorist offences — Extraordinary rendition — Arbitrary detention — Whether detention of terrorist suspects by United States’ authorities arbitrary — Macedonian authorities handing over applicant to agents of United States Central Intelligence Agency — Whether real risk of flagrant violation of applicant’s rights under Article 5 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Whether applicant’s subsequent detention in Afghanistan imputable to respondent State — Whether respondent State violating Article 5 of Convention

Damages — Non-pecuniary damage — Serious violations of several provisions of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Whether applicant suffering non-pecuniary damage — Whether finding of violations sufficient — Article 41 of Convention

Aliens — Treatment — Access to consul — Whether alien possesses a right to have consul informed of his arrest — Whether failure to inform consul renders criminal proceedings a nullity

Consular relations — Position and functions of consul — Access to nationals under arrest — The law of Italy

Environment — Climate change — Rising sea levels — Threat to certain States — Nature of international law obligations — Whether person from threatened State entitled to refugee status

Human rights — Economic and social rights — Climate change — Whether requiring person to return to country threatened by climate change would violate human rights

Aliens — Refugees — United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951 — Article 1A(2) — Definition of a refugee — Recognition as a refugee — Meaning of persecution — Whether climate change provides grounds for recognition as a refugee — Indiscriminate impact of environmental change — Environmental degradation and refugee status — Human agency and climate change — The law of New Zealand