Governments — Recognition — Policy of not granting or withholding recognition of governments — United Kingdom policy statement of April 1980 — Whether adopted by the Government of New Zealand — Coup d'état in Fiji — Whether new regime in Fiji the Government of Fiji — Lease of premises in New Zealand to the Government of Fiji for use as premises of diplomatic mission — Whether new regime in Fiji entitled to continue in possession of premises — Whether Attorney-General in new Government of Fiji possessing locus standi in New Zealand courts — Executive certificate — Whether New Zealand and Fiji still having dealings on Government to Government basis — Diplomatic relations between the two States not severed — Whether implied recognition

Recognition — Governments — Policy of not granting or withholding recognition of governments — Dealings on government to government basis — Whether implied recognition

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Executive statements — Recognition of States and governments — Certificate stating nature of dealings with new regime in foreign State but not taking position on recognition — Role of the courts in interpreting certificate — Whether the courts able to consider evidence contrary to certificate — The law of New Zealand

Extradition — General — Fugitive Offenders Act 1967 — Whether applicable only to Commonwealth countries — Fiji — Proclamation of republic following coup d'état — Fiji ceasing to be a member of the Commonwealth — Political offence — When question whether offence political to be considered by the courts — Whether suitable for adjudication on habeas corpus proceedings before hearing in front of Magistrate — Procedure

States — Commonwealth — Membership — Fiji ceasing to be member of the Commonwealth after coup d'état — Effects — The law of England

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Act of State and justiciability — United States act of State doctrine — United States bombardment of Libya — Use of bases in the United Kingdom by aircraft involved in bombardment — Whether action of United Kingdom Government in allowing use of bases an act of State

State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Immunity of Head of Government of foreign State — Determination to allow immunity by Executive conclusive — Torts — Whether United Kingdom entitled to immunity in respect of decision to allow use of United Kingdom territory for mounting military operations against Libya — Immunity of President of the United States for acts as commander-in-chief — Immunity of officials — Immunity of United States before its own courts

War and armed conflict — Self-defence — Reaction to terrorist attacks — Aerial bombardment — United States bombardment of Libya — Whether an illicit act of war — The law of the United States

International organizations — Immunity — International organization possessing immunity in State where headquarters located — Whether entitled to immunity in courts of another member State — Immunity of International Tin Council under United Kingdom law — Whether comity requires recognition of that immunity by courts in Malaysia

Comity — Recognition of foreign laws required by comity — Whether comity requires courts in Malaysia to give effect to immunity of international organization under United Kingdom law — The law of Malaysia

International organizations — Immunity — Whether international organization entitled to immunity in State which is not a member of organization — Whether organization has sovereign status — International Tin Council — Whether entitled to immunity under United States law — Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act — International Organizations Immunities Act — Immunity of International Tin Council under United Kingdom law — Whether comity requires recognition of that immunity by courts in the United States — International Tin Council-United Kingdom Headquarters Agreement, 1972 — International Tin Council (Immunities and Privileges) Order 1972 — Scope of immunity under United Kingdom law — Arbitration proceedings — Waiver of immunity — Whether act of State doctrine applicable to commercial contract between International Tin Council and New York corporation

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Act of State and justiciability — United States act of State doctrine — Whether applicable to commercial transactions — Whether applicable to acts of international organizations

Comity — Recognition of foreign laws required by comity — Whether comity requires courts in the United States to give effect to immunity accorded to international organization by United Kingdom law — Whether that immunity intended to have extraterritorial effect — The law of the United States

International organizations — Personality — Legal personality of international organizations in English law — Organization granted the legal capacities of a body corporate — Whether organization thus created a body corporate — Whether capacities of a body corporate include capacity to incur contractual liabilities on own account — Whether members liable for contracts concluded in the name of the organization — International Tin Council — Sixth International Tin Agreement, 1982 — International Tin Council-United Kingdom Headquarters Agreement, 1972 — International Tin Council (Immunities and Privileges) Order 1972 — The law of England

International organizations — Personality — Concept of international legal personality — Whether organization a legal entity distinct from its members — Whether personality of organization excludes liability of members for obligations incurred by the organization — Whether general principle that members incur concurrent or secondary liability for debts of organization in absence of provision excluding or limiting liability — International Tin Council — Sixth International Tin Agreement, 1982 — Comparison with constitutions of other international organizations — Whether International Tin Council contracted as agent for its members — Legal personality of international organizations in English law — International Organizations Act 1968 — International Tin Council-United Kingdom Headquarters Agreement, 1972 — International Tin Council (Immunities and Privileges) Order 1972 — Provision that Council should have the legal capacities of a body corporate — Whether conferring status of a body corporate in English law — Whether a recognition of Council's international legal personality — Whether English courts entitled to consider Sixth International Tin Agreement to determine scope and nature of Council's personality in international law

International organizations — Constitutions — International Tin Council — Whether Council controlled by its members — Whether a separate entity from its members — Whether Council contracted as agent for its members

International organizations — Immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Scope and extent — Whether members of organization benefit from provisions of municipal law conferring immunity upon organization — Allegation that members liable concurrently with organization — Whether immunity of organization would prevent action against members

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Act of State and justiciability — Doctrine of non-justiciability in English law — Scope and extent — Principle that unincorporated treaties cannot change English law — Principle that English courts cannot enforce an unincorporated treaty — Act of State doctrine — Principle that English courts will not sit in judgment upon transactions between sovereign States — Relationship between the different principles of act of State and non-justiciability — Relationship between act of State and non-justiciability and principles of sovereign immunity

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Custom — Whether part of the law of England — Extent to which English courts may apply rules of international law — Uncertain state of rules in question — Role of the English courts in determining content of international law — Treaties — Application by municipal courts — Treaty not incorporated into municipal law by legislation — Whether municipal court may enforce obligations of States derived from treaty — Whether municipal courts may refer to treaty establishing international organization in order to establish nature of organization's personality in international law

Sources of international law — Customary international law — State practice — Treaties — Treaties establishing international organizations — Significance of presence in certain treaties of provisions excluding liability of members for debts of organization — Writings of publicists

State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Entitlement to sovereign immunity at common law — European Economic Community — Whether entitled to immunity analogous to that conferred upon foreign States — Whether treaties constituting the Community require Member States to accord immunity — Commercial transactions — Exception to immunity for proceedings relating to commercial transactions — Whether extending to proceedings against State in respect of contract concluded by international organization — Obligations of State to be performed in the United Kingdom — State Immunity Act 1978, Section 3(l)(a) and (b) — Relationship between State immunity and immunity of international organizations — Relationship between principles of State immunity and act of State and non-justiciability

States — Entities claiming sovereign status — European Economic Community — Whether exercising functions equivalent to those of a State — Whether entitled to immunities analogous to those accorded to foreign States — Recognition of entitlement to immunity — The law of England

International organizations — Personality — Concept of international legal personality — Personality of organization in municipal law — Whether organization created by treaty a body corporate — Whether courts of a Member State possessing jurisdiction to wind up organization on a petition from a creditor — International Tin Council — Sixth International Tin Agreement, 1982 — International Tin Council-United Kingdom Headquarters Agreement, 1972 — International Tin Council (Immunities and Privileges) Order 1972

International organizations — Immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Exception to immunity in respect of proceedings for the enforcement of an arbitration award — Whether exception extending to petition to wind up organization for failing to satisfy award

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — Recourse to treaty by municipal court to determine attributes of international organization — The law of England

International organizations — Personality — Concept of international legal personality — Rights of international organization against its members — Whether justiciable in a municipal court — Whether creditor entitled to appointment of a receiver by way of equitable execution over assets of organization — Assets of organization said to include right to be indemnified by its members — Legal basis of right — International Tin Council — Sixth International Tin Agreement, 1982 — International Tin Council-United Kingdom Headquarters Agreement, 1972 — International Tin Council (Immunities and Privileges) Order 1972

Relationship between international law and municipal law — Act of State and justiciability — Doctrine of non-justiciability in English law — Scope and extent — Act of State doctrine — Principle that English courts will not sit in judgment upon transactions between sovereign States — Principle that English courts cannot enforce rights between parties to an unincorporated treaty — Relationship between different principles of act of State and non-justiciability — Relationship between act of State and non-justiciability and principles of sovereign immunity — Whether principle that English courts will not adjudicate upon transactions between sovereign States applies to commercial transactions of States — Treaties — Application by municipal courts — Treaty not incorporated into municipal law — Whether municipal court may enforce obligations of States derived from treaty

State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Exception to immunity for proceedings relating to State's membership of unincorporated body which has members other than States — Whether applicable to proceedings relating to membership of body whose only members are States and the European Economic Community — The law of England

International organizations — Immunity — Attachment and execution — Whether assets of organization liable to attachment to satisfy arbitration award — Discovery of assets — Whether court has jurisdiction to require organization to make full disclosure of its assets — Officials — Immunity — Immunity from suit and legal process for things done or omitted to be done by officials in performance of their functions — Whether conferring immunity from being required to give evidence — Inviolability of archives — Whether order that organization disclose details of its assets inconsistent with inviolability of official archives — The law of England

Territory — Boundaries — Acceptance by States involved — Principle of stability of boundaries — Application — Acts evidencing an acceptance of the boundary — Administrative acts — Maps — Absence of formal protest

Territory — Boundaries — Delimitation — Treaty of delimitation — Interpretation — Demarcation — Relationship between delimitation and demarcation — Alleged inconsistency between principles in treaty of delimitation and demarcation on the ground — Whether treaty should prevail — Whether demarcation to be treated as an authoritative interpretation of treaty — 1906 Agreement between Egypt and Turkey regarding boundary between Egypt and Palestine — Demarcation of boundary through construction of boundary pillars — Whether pillars wrongly located — Requirement that pillars be intervisible — Whether departed from — Significance of departure — Whether line as demarcated accepted by States involved — Subsequent reference to line defined by 1906 Agreement — Whether a reference to line as demarcated or to principles contained in the Agreement

Territory — Critical date — Principle of the critical date or the critical period — Treaty of Peace between Egypt and Israel, 1979 — Description of boundary between Egypt and Israel as “the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine” — Effect on critical date — Whether entire Mandate period to be treated as critical period

Arbitration — Competence of arbitration tribunal — Arbitration Compromis between Egypt and Israel, 1986 — Scope of question referred to Tribunal — Boundary dispute — Tribunal required to determine location of boundary pillars — Tribunal required to choose between locations claimed by Parties — Evidence that pillar situated at location other than those claimed by Parties — Principle of relative strength of claims — Reference to “final” pillar — Evidence that final pillar may have been situated at location not claimed by either Party — Effect on competence of Tribunal — Whether Tribunal confronted with non licet — Whether arbitration frustrated — Whether Tribunal required to prevent frustration of arbitration

Arbitration — Compromis — Interpretation — Terms used in Compromis taken from earlier treaty — Whether these terms to be given same meaning in both agreements

Arbitration — Evidence — Recognition of boundary by States — Evidence of acts constituting recognition of boundary — Publication of reference work — Whether an administrative act — Statistical Yearbook published by government

Sources of international law — General — State practice — Acts constituting State practice — Publication of reference work

Sources of international law — Protest and acquiescence — Estoppel — Acceptance of boundary by States over a period of time — Whether precluding subsequent challenge to location of boundary pillars

State succession — Boundaries — Succession of new State to boundaries of former mandated territory — Israel

Treaties — Interpretation — Subsequent conduct of parties — Treaty providing for delimitation of boundary — Whether subsequent demarcation on the ground an authoritative interpretation of the treaty — Effect of subsequent conduct in relation to boundary — Same terms used in two different treaties — Later treaty reflecting language of earlier treaty — Whether terms to be given same interpretation in both agreements

War and armed conflict — Peace treaties — Treaty of Peace between Egypt and Israel, 1979 — Implementation — Boundary between Egypt and Israel — Arbitration in accordance with Peace Treaty

State immunity — Foreign Heads of State — Personal immunity from criminal jurisdiction of other States — Chairman of Council of State of German Democratic Republic — Immunity from jurisdiction of courts of Federal Republic of Germany — The law of the Federal Republic of Germany

State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Action against foreign State — Procedure — Service of writ — Whether practicable to transmit writ through Ministry of Foreign Affairs — Conditions for service of writ by publication — Identity of defendant — Whether ambassador of foreign State a proper defendant — Action against the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics regarding Chernobyl accident

Diplomatic relations — Immunity — Diplomat — Ambassador — Action against foreign State — Whether ambassador a proper defendant

Jurisdiction — Territorial — Tort committed outside jurisdiction — Effects within jurisdiction — Burden of proof

Environment — Action against State regarding environmental damage — Chernobyl nuclear accident — The law of the Federal Republic of Germany

State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Distinction between sovereign and non-sovereign activities of foreign State — Whether classification of activity a matter for international law, the law of the forum or the law of the State engaged in the activity — Production of nuclear energy — Whether a sovereign activity — State corporation — Soviet corporation operating Chernobyl nuclear plant — Whether an entity distinct from the State — Jurisdiction claimed on basis of ownership of property in use for non-sovereign purposes

State responsibility — Transboundary nuclear pollution — Duties of State operating nuclear plant — Duty under international law to provide information about nuclear accidents — Whether breach gives rise to claim by individual — Federal Republic of Germany Federal Atomic Energy Act, Section 25(1) — Whether Union of Soviet Socialist Republics of State corporation the operator of the Chernoby1 nuclear plant — Test of control — Liability in tort

Environment — Action against State regarding environmental damage — Transboundary nuclear pollution — Chernobyl nuclear accident — Whether resident of Federal Republic of Germany entitled to damages for damage caused by pollution — Nature of duty of State operating nuclear plant

Jurisdication — Territorial — Tort committed outside jurisdiction — Effects within jurisdication — Transboundary nuclear pollution — The law of the Federal Republic of Germany

Diplomatic relations — Special missions — Status under customary international law — Inter-State agreements providing for immunity of special envoys — Conditions for effectiveness under customary international law — Requirement of specific task — United Nations Convention on Special Missions, 1969 — Whether embodying rules of customary international law

Diplomatic relations — Special missions — Conditions for establishment — Agreement between sending and receiving States — Requirement of specific task — Whether detailed description of tasks to be performed is required — Whether tacit agreement is sufficient

Diplomatic relations — Immunity — Special envoys — Immunity from criminal jurisdiction — Scope of immunity — Whether wider than immunity of members of diplomatic missions — Functional theory — Agreement to grant immunity ad personam ineffective under municipal law — Whether immunity may be established after entry of envoy into receiving State — Circumstances in which concept of abuse may prevent immunity from being recognized — Whether immunity extends until envoy leaves receiving State even if mission terminates earlier

Diplomatic relations — Immunity — Diplomats — Scope of immunity — Whether immunity gives rise to exemption from prosecution or merely constitutes a procedural bar — Circumstances in which envoy may be subject to prosecution upon cessation of functions — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961, Article 39(2)

States — Conduct of foreign relations — Scope of judicial review — Inter-State agreement conferring immunity on special envoy — Whether subject to scrutiny by municipal courts

Sources of international law — General — State practice — Treaties — Writings of publicists — Evolution of customary international law — Diplomatic relations — Special missions

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Customary international law — Application by municipal courts — Rules of international law governing status and immunity of special envoys — Inter-State agreement concerning special envoy — Justiciability by municipal courts — The law of the Federal Republic of Germany

Expropriation — Conditions of legality — Expropriation on promise of compensation — Whether any requirement that amount of compensation be determined in advance — Provision for payment of compensation following transfer of assets — Whether contrary to ordre public international

Expropriation — Extraterritorial effect — Debt — Situs of debt — Guarantee of debt — Whether guarantee governed by same law as debt — Whether affected by expropriation — The law of France

Expropriation — Extraterritorial effect — Debt — Nationalization by Algeria of subsidiary of French company — Transfer of subsidiary’s assets to Algerian State corporation — Effect on debt allegedly owed by French company to subsidiary — Parent company ordered by Algerian court to pay sum owed to State corporation — Whether judgment of Algerian court will be enforced by French courts — The law of France

State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Sovereign acts — Nationalization of mining concession owned by foreign company — Claim brought by former concessionaire — Entitlement of nationalizing State to sovereign immunity

Expropriation — Conditions of legality — Nationalization without compensation — Mining concession owned by foreign company — Claim brought by former concessionaire — Whether nationalizing State entitled to immunity — Whether companies which benefited from the nationalization liable in damages — Concepts of ordre public — The law of France

Expropriation — Conditions of legality — Requirement of compensation by expropriating State — Property of French nationals in Algeria — Expropriation without compensation — Whether contrary to French concepts of ordre public — Transfer of assets to Algerian State corporation — Whether corporation liable to compensate original owner of property — Payment of compensation to owner by French State — Whether releasing Algerian State from obligation to pay compensation

State responsibility — For acts of expropriation — Duty to pay compensation — Whether payment of compensation to owner by State of her nationality discharges obligation of expropriating State — The law of France