On 17 April 2013 the US Supreme Court has delivered the longtime awaited decision on Kiobel. Even if all Justices have shared the view that the Alien Tort Statute does not allow jurisdiction in this case, their reasoning differ notably. Compare in particular Chief Justice Roberts’ majority opinion with Justice Breyer’s opinion (joined by Justices Guinsburg, Kagan and Sotomayor).
See the decision: kiobel
PILAGG invites you to the workshop
From Fragmentation to Convergence – 31 Jan / 1 Feb 2013
After two decades of fragmentation discourse, international courts and other bodies cross reference each other, and emphasise international law as a single, unified system of law one cannot break up into separate specialist fields. This applies to treaty interpretation, as the ICJ underlined recently in Diallo (Compensation). The same basic approach to the formation and identification of customary international law applies regardless of the field of law under consideration.
This bilingual seminar asks, What are the consequences for the principles of treaty interpretation and the formation of customary international law?
See the transcript of the hearings on Kiobel of 1st October 2012
The US Department of Justice has presented a supplemental brief in Kiobel et al v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co et al (USSC, N° 10-1491).
As it is well known, the question is whether and under what circumstances the Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C. 1350, allows courts to recognize a cause of action for violations of the law of nations occurring within the territory of a sovereign other than the United States.
Even though this brief may disappoint some expectations, its very content has several points of great interest that deserve to be read and debated.
See the amicus brief on: 10-1491bssacUnitedStates-2
Jodie KIRSHNER, “Why is the U.S. abdicating the policing of multinational corporations to Europe?: Extraterritorialism, sovereignty, and the Alien Tort Statute”
The U.S. has policed the multinational effects of multinational
corporations more aggressively than any other country, but recent decisions
under the Alien Tort Statute indicate that it is now backtracking. Europe,
paradoxically, is moving in the other direction. Why do some countries
retract extraterritorial jurisdiction while others step forward? The
article traces the opposing trends through corporate human rights cases and
suggests that the answer may lie in attitudes towards national sovereignty.
The developments raise important questions regarding the position of the
U.S. in a globalizing world and its role in upholding international norms.
Where? At room H202A, 28 rue des Saints-Pères, 75007 Paris
When? May 4th, 12:30 to 2:30pm
Jodie Adams Kirshner is a University Lecturer in Corporate Law, a fellow of Peterhouse College, Cambridge and the Deputy Director of the Cambridge Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law. She has completed research fellowships at the Oxford Centre for Socio-Legal Studies and the Cambridge Centre for Business Research as a Fulbright Scholar, the London Business School Centre for Corporate Governance, and the Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law in Hamburg, Germany. She received her undergraduate degree from Harvard University and graduate degrees from Columbia University in New York.