Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T04:42:13.338Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Recueil des Cours de l’Académie de Droit International de La Haye, 1983. 5 vols. (Vols. 179, 180, 181, 182 and 183 of the collection.) The Hague, Boston, London; Dordrecht, Boston, Lancaster: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. Vol. I, 1984: pp. 412; vol. II, 1984: pp. 411; vol. III, 1984: pp. 409; vol. IV, 1984: pp. 469; vol. V, 1985: pp. 382.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Alfred P. Rubin
Alfred P. Rubin*
Affiliation:
The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy
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
Book Reviews and Notes
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 82 , Issue 4 , October 1988 , pp. 841 - 853
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1988

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 The word appears to have entered the common law via a Latin phrase used by Mansfield in holding the law of the place of contracting to be the proper law of the contract “ex comitate et jure gentium.” Robinson v. Bland, [1760] 2 Burrow 1077. “Jure gentium” at that time referred to a hypothesized universal substantive law whose traces still survive in modern admiralty law, but whose utility was undermined and whose supposed rules have been, in the main, superseded by the evolution of conflict-of-laws theory. This is not the place for a fuller analysis.

2 “En conséquence … l’on peut définir le sujet du droit international comme étant celui dont la conduite est prévue directement et effectivement par le droit des gens en tant que contenu d’un droit ou d’une obligation” (p. 168).

3 For example, the “pirates” defeated by Pompey the Great in 67 B.C. were considered by the Roman Senate to be subordinate to Rome and not independent, but were in fact treated as honorable enemies during and after the conflict. 5 Plutarch, Parallel Lives of Greeks and Romans 173–77 (C. B. Perrin, trans. 1917). While the privateers of James II and Louis XIV were treated as “pirates” under English law after the abdication of 1688, their defeated soldiers after the battle of the Boyne were treated as combatants and not as criminals. See the petition of John Golding and others to the House of Lords in 1693, 12 Howell’s State Trials 1270, 1275 ff (1816).

4 Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicar. v. U.S.), Merits, 1986 ICJ Rep. 14 (Judgment of June 27).

5 Some indication of the causes for this situation in the negotiating process are analyzed in Rubin, Liability for Damages from Space Activities and the Need for Domestic Legislation, 7 AFJAG L. Rev. 30 (1965). I do not like to cite my own rather outdated work in a book review, but Gorove cites very little in this section and his bibliography is slim.

6 23 Brit. Y.B. Int’l L. 1 (1946).

7 De jure belli ac pads, bk. II, ch. III, sec. xiii, para. 2. I have checked the 1632 edition but have been unable to find either the 1631 or 1625 first edition.