000			03500nam a22004095i 4500
001			978-3-540-27883-2
003			DE-He213
005			20161121230632.0
007			cr nn 008mamaa
008			100301s2005 gw | s |||| 0|eng d
020			_a9783540278832 _9978-3-540-27883-2
024	7		_a10.1007/3-540-27883-4 _2doi
050		4	_aK3150
072		7	_aLBB _2bicssc
072		7	_aLAW051000 _2bisacsh
082	0	4	_a341 _223
100	1		_aBankas, Ernest K. _eauthor.
245	1	4	_aThe State Immunity Controversy in International Law _h[electronic resource] : _bPrivate Suits Against Sovereign States in Domestic Courts / _cby Ernest K. Bankas.
264		1	_aBerlin, Heidelberg : _bSpringer Berlin Heidelberg, _c2005.
300			_aXVIII, 542 p. _bonline resource.
336			_atext _btxt _2rdacontent
337			_acomputer _bc _2rdamedia
338			_aonline resource _bcr _2rdacarrier
347			_atext file _bPDF _2rda
505	0		_aThe Historical Origins of the Concept of Absolute Immunity of States -- The Development of the Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity: A Claim Against France Before American Courts and its Aftereffects -- The Rights and Immunities of States in Foreign Courts: A Study of Absolute Immunity of States -- The Changing Law of Sovereign Immunity in U.S. and U.K. Courts: A Look at the Restrictive Immunity Rule -- Private Suits Against African Countries in Foreign Courts -- The Practice of African States in the Matter of Jurisdictional Immunities of States: Is it Still Absolute Immunity or Restrictive Immunity -- A Look at the ILC Report on Jurisdictional Immunities of Foreign States and Their Property -- Sovereign States Before Foreign Courts: An Observation on Certain Unsettled or Lingering State Immunity Problems -- State Immunity and the Violation of International Law: Some Recent Developments in the Law of State Immunity -- The Acceptance of the Proposed UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property, A Recent Development -- The Current State of the Law of Sovereign Immunity -- Conclusion: A Modest Proposal for Resolving the Sovereign Immunity Controversy.
520			_aThe author shows through a careful analysis of the law that restrictive immunity does not have vox populi in developing countries, and that it lacks usus. He also argues that forum law, i.e. the lex fori is a creature of sovereignty and between equals before the law, only what is understood and acknowledged as law among states must be applied in as much as the international legal system is horizontal. Furthermore, the state never acts as a juridical or natural person and, therefore, in logical terms, its functions cannot be divided into potere politico and persona civile, as a prelude to determine jurisdiction. The said Italian doctrine therefore is ex facie erroneous, and that a simple dichotomy between absolute immunity and restrictive immunity wholly predicated on the nature test alone would not be helpful in promoting justice. Hence, arbitration and comparative dominant theory are suggested instead in the resolution of this elusive problem.
650		0	_aLaw.
650		0	_aPublic international law.
650	1	4	_aLaw.
650	2	4	_aPublic International Law.
710	2		_aSpringerLink (Online service)
773	0		_tSpringer eBooks
776	0	8	_iPrinted edition: _z9783540256953
856	4	0	_uhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-27883-4
912			_aZDB-2-SHU
950			_aHumanities, Social Sciences and Law (Springer-11648)
999			_c501698 _d501698