Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-d8cs5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T09:59:15.099Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

General International Law and the Common Law: A Decade of Developments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2017

James Crawford
James Crawford*
Affiliation:
Australian Law Reform Commission; the University of Adelaide
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Application of Customary International Law by National Tribunals
Information
Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting , Volume 76 , 1982 , pp. 232 - 244
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Cf. I. BROWNLIE, PRINCIPLES OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW 44-49, 58-59 (3d ed. 1979).

2 [1979] I.C.R. 787, [1980] 2 C.M.L.R. 217.

3 630 F.2d 876 (2d Cir. 1980).

4 See, The International Law Standard in the Statutes of Australia and the United Kingdom, 73 AJIL 628 (1979).

5 Bonser v. La Macchia, (1969) 122 C.L.R. 177; New South Wales v. Commonwealth, (1975) 135 C.L.R. 337; A. Raptis & Sons v. South Australia, (1977) 138 C.L.R. 346; Chen Yin Ten v. Little, (1976) 11 A.L.R. 353; Li Chia Hsing v. Rankin, (1979) 141 C.L.R. 182.

6 [1931] A.C. 126.

7 Cf. I. BROWNLIE, supra note 1, at 50-51.

8 1933] A.C. 402.

9 [1962] A.C. 1, 24.

10 In the years 1962-71, 33 cases are discussed in the section of the British Yearbook of International Law dealing with British cases involving questions of international law. In the years 1972- 81, the equivalent figure is 62. Only cases raising substantial issues of international law are discussed.

11 H.P. Bulmer Ltd. v. J . Bollinger S.A., [1974] Ch. 401, 418.

I2 Although other courts have tended to dismiss this influence: cf. James Buchanan & Co. Ltd. v. Babco Ltd., [1978] A.C. 141,153 per Lord Wilberforce; Fothergill v. Monarch Airlines Ltd., [1981] A.C. 251, 276 per Lord Wilberforce, 279 per Lord Diplock.

13 E.g., the Sunday Times case, note 14 infra (contempt of court); the Tyrer case, 26 PUBLICATIONS OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS, SER. A, JUDGMENTS & DECISIONS (1978) (corporal punishment); the Golder case, 19 id. (1975) (prisoner's access to legal advice); Ireland v. United Kingdom, 25 id. (1978) (“cruel and degrading” treatment of IRA detainees).

14 A good example is Attorney-General v. British Broadcasting Corp. [1981] A.C. 303, where the House of Lords, in a case concerning contempt of court, had to deal with the implications of the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in the Sunday Times case (30 PUBLICATIONS OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS, SER. A, JUDGMENTS & DECISIONS 1 (1979)), holding that the earlier decision of the House in Attorney-General v. Times Newspapers, [1974] A.C. 273 contravened Article 10(2) of the European Convention. See 51 BRIT. Y.B. INT'L L. 306 (1980).

15 The Philippine Admiral, [1977] A.C. 373; I Congreso del Partido, [1981] 3 W.L.R. 328.

16 [1977] Q.B. 529. See 48 BRIT. Y.B. INT'L L. 253 (1976-77).

17 The Philippine Admiral, supra note 16, at 402; Trendtex Trading Corp. v. Central Bank of Nigeria, [1977] Q.B. 529, 571-72per Stephenson L.J.; The Ugandan Co. (Holdings) Ltd. v. Government of Uganda, (1979) 1 Lloyd's Rep. 481.

18 Hispano Americana Mercantil S.A. v. Central Bank of Nigeria, [1979] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 277.

19 [1981] 3 W.L.R. 328, esp. 334-5 per Lord Wilberforce. And see 52 BRIT. Y.B. INT'L L. 314 (1981).

20 Inter-Science Research and Development Services (Pty.) Ltd. v. Republica Popular de Mocambique, [1980] 2 S.AF.L.R. I l l (T.P.D.); Kaffraria Property Co. (Pty.) Ltd. v. Government of the Republic of Zambia, [1980] 2 S.AF.L.R. 709.

21 Marine Steel Ltd. v. Government of the Marshall Islands, [1981] 2 N.Z.L.R.l; Buckingham v. The Aircraft Hughes 500D Helicopter Reg. Mark C-GPNN (not yet reported, 23 Feb. 1982).

22 See note 19 supra.

23 Salomon v. Customs & Excise Commissioners, [1967] 2 Q.B. 116; Post Office v. Estuary Radio Ltd., [1968] 2Q.B. 740.

24 [1978] A.C. 141, 153. See also The Jade, [1976] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 1 (H.L.).

25 [1981] A.C. 251, 293-94.

26 [1982] 2 W.L.R. 918, 934-35.

27 See note 24 supra, and 49 BRIT. Y.B. INT'L L. 276 (1978).

28 See note 25 supra, and 51 BRIT. Y.B. INT'L L. 320-21 (1980).

29 Id.

30 Ulster-Swift Ltd. v. Taunton Meat Haulage Ltd., [1977] 1 W.L.R. 625 (C.A.); Fothergill v. Monarch Airlines, [1981] A.C. 251, 276 per Lord Wilberforce.

31 Ulster-Swift Ltd. v. Taunton Meat Haulage Ltd., supra note 30; Buchanan's case, supra note 27; Fothergill v. Monarch Airlines, supra note 28.

32 Fothergill v. Monarch Airlines, [1981] A.C. 251, 272 per Lord Wilberforce.

33 Carriage by Air Act 1961 (U.K.), § 6(2); Civil Aviation (Carriers’ Liability) Act 1959 (Aust.), § 9(3) (requires the inconsistency to be “shown“).

34 Cf. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969, Arts. 31-33, 63 AJIL 875, 885-86 (1969), 8 ILM 679, 691-93 (1969).

35 See note 28 supra.

36 Davis v. Johnson, [1979] A.C. 264.

37 Cf. 51 BRIT. Y.B. INT'L L. 321-25 (1980).

38 As with the EEC Treaty: cf. Garland v. British Rail Eng. Ltd., [1982] 2 W.L.R. 918, 934 per Lord Diplock. But courts below House of Lords level are sometimes curiously reluctant to take statutory hints, or even directions: e.g., Smith Kline & French Laboratories Ltd. v. Harbottle (Mercantile) Ltd., [1980] 1 C.M.L.R. 277; Rothmans of Pall Mall (Overseas) Ltd. v. Saudi Arabian Airlines Corp., [1980] 3 All E.R. 359. See 51 BRIT. Y.B. INT'L L. 309-13 (1980).

39 Cf. Oppenheimer v. Cattermole, [1976] A.C. 249; Garland v. British Rail Engineering Pty Ltd., [1982] 2 W.L.R. 918.

40 [1980] A.C. 744.

41 [1975] UNITED KINGDOM TREATY SERIES NO. 123.

42 Cf. 50 BRIT. Y.B. INT'L L. 232 (1979).

43 See Duffy, English Law and the European Convention on Human Rights, 29 INT'L & COMP. LAW Q. 585 (1980).

44 E.g., Waddington v. Miah, [1974] 2 All E.R. 377; Minister of Home Affairs v. Fisher, [1979] 2 W.L.R. 889; Williams v. Home Office (No. 2), [1981] 1 All E.R. 1211.

45 E.g., R. v. Home Secretary, ex parte Phansopkar, [1975] 3 All E.R. 497.

46 E.g., R. v. Chief Immigration Officer, Heathrow Airport, ex parte Salamat Bibi, [1976] 3 All E.R. 843; Science Research Council v. Nasse, [1979] 3 W.L.R. 762; Guilfoyle v. Home Office, [1981]- Q.B. 309.

47 [1978] 1 Q.B. 36. See 50 BRIT. Y.B. INT'L L. 270 (1979).

48 See note 13 supra.

49 [1979] 1 Ch. 344. See 50 BRIT. Y.B. INT'L L. 232 (1979).

50 [1979] 1 Ch. 344, 380.

51 [1981] A.C. 303; See note 14 supra.

52 [1981] A.C. 251, 283. Lord Fraser disagreed on this point, id. at 289.

53 [1976] A.C. 249. See Merrills, Oppenheimer v. Cattermole-The Curtain Falls, 24 INT'L & COMP. L.Q. 627-28 (1975).

54 [1976] A.C. 249, 277-78. Lord Hudson (id. at 265) and Lord Salmon ﹛id. at 282) agreed with Lord Cross. Lord Pearson ﹛id. at 265) dissented. Lord Hailsham L.C. was inclined to agree with Lord Pearson ﹛id. at 263). See also Dalmia Dairy Indus. Ltd. v. National Bank of Pakistan, [1978] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 223, 300-01 per Megaw L.J.

55 [1978] 1 Q.B. 205, 217-18, 222. On appeal, no member of the House of Lords commented on this aspect of the case: [1979] A.C. 508.

56 [1971] I.C.J. Rep. 6.

57 [1977] A.C. 373, 399.

58 [1978] A.C. 547. See 49 BRIT. Y.B. INT'L L. 282 (1978).

59 In re James, [1977] 1 Ch. 41, held, High Court of Rhodesia under U.D.I, not a “British court.“

60 Reel v. Holder, [1981] 1 W.L.R. 1226, held Taiwan a “country” within the meaning of the IAAF rules.

61 Spinney's (1948) Ltd. v. Royal Ins. Co. Ltd., [1980] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 406, at 426, 429 per Mustill J. See 51 BRIT. Y.B. INT'L L. 303 (1980).

62 Government of the State of Kuwait v. Snow & Partners, [1981] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 656. See 52 BRIT. Y.B. INT'L L. 301 (1981).

63 fl977] 3 W.L.R. 859. See 49 BRIT. Y.B. INT'L L. 261 (1978).

64 (1876) 2 Ex.D.63. The interpretation of Keyn's Case remains, of course, a highly contentious matter. See 51 BRIT. YB. INT'L L. 59-61 (1980).

65 [1980] 1 Q.B. 390.

66 Id. at 404 per Lord Denning M.R.

67 W. at 407 per Sir David Cairns.

68 M at 406 per Bridge L.J.

69 See, e.g., D.P.P. v. O'Neill, [1975] N.I.L.R. 177; Simsek v. McPhee, (1982) 56 A.L.J.R. 277.

70 E.g., Malone v. Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1979] 1 Ch. 344, although Megarry V.C. refused to give a declaration that local remedies had been exhausted.

71 It is, of course, quite another matter if the domestic validity of the legislation does depend in some way on international law, as may be the case with the Canadian provinces (cf. Re Alberta Union of Provincial Employees, 130 D.L.R.(3d) 191 (1981), and, in certain circumstances, with Commonwealth legislation under the “external affairs” power in the Australian Constitution: Koowarta v. Bjelke-Petersen, [1982] 39 A.L.R. 417.

72 [1974] 1 Q.B. 684; 47 BRIT. Y.B. INT'L L. 352 (1974-75).

73 [1974] 1 Q.B. 684, 702.

74 Cf. Akehurst, Uganda Asians and the Thakrar Case, 38 MOD.L.REV. 72 (1975).

75 [1978] A.C. 547, 609 per Lord Wilberforce; id. at 643 per Lord Fraser.

76 See notes 40, 42 supra.

77 E.g., Masinimport v. Scottish Mechanical Light Indus. Ltd., [1976] S.L.T. 245. Cf. note 62 supra.

78 Thai-Europe Tapioca Service v. Government of Pakistan, [1975] 1 W.L.R. 1485, C.A. The inconsistency was such that Donaldson J. held Trendtex to have been decided per incuriam: see notes 17, 18 supra.

79 [1981] 3 W.L.R. 787.

80 See note 57 supra.

81 [1905] 2 K.B. 391.

82 The same may well be true of Chung Chi Cheung v. R., [1939] A.C. 160. See I. BBOWNLIE, supra note 1, at 47-49.

83 Cf. Cane Prerogative Acts, Act of State, and Justiciability, 29 INT'L & COMP. L. Q. 680 (1980). The position is different in the area of prize law where the prerogative may be limited by international law. The Zamora, [1916] 2 A.C. 77.

84 See note 53 supra.

85 See note 16 supra.

86 See note 35 supra.

87 See note 19 supra.

88 See note 72 supra.

89 See note 78 supra.

90 [1981] 3 W.L.R. 787. For the proceedings below on this point see [1975] 1 Q.B. 557.

91 E.g., [1981] 3 W.L.R. 787, 800, 803-04, 809-10 per Lord Wilberforce.