On April 1, 1987, Japan's new system for regulation of activities of foreign lawyers came into effect. After considerable internal and external debate, Japan joined those other jurisdictions that have provided a regularized, limited professional status for foreign lawyers advising on foreign and international law. On May 21, the first three foreign lawyers gained approval from the Ministry of Justice. Meanwhile, in 1986–87, the District of Columbia, Michigan, Hawaii and California joined New York in permitting practice by foreign legal consultants. Similar rules are now pending in Texas as well. The California, District of Columbia and New York rules appear at I.L.M. page 977.

On July 2, 1986, the Dutch Parliament adopted a statute modernizing Dutch law on arbitration. Although it does not technically distinguish between domestic and international arbitration, this statute, following the trend initiated by the United Kingdom [1979 Arbitration Act, 18 I.L.M. 1249 (1979)], France [Decree of May 12, 1981, 20 I.L.M. 917 (1981)], and Belgium [March 27, 1985 Statute, 25 I.L.M. 725 (1986)], clearly purports to liberalize Dutch law on international arbitration. The travaux preparatoires states that it does not substantially depart from the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration [24 I.L.M. 1302 (1985)]. The statute came into force on December 1, 1986, and applies to pending arbitration cases.

In 1986 Florida became the first state in the United States to adopt a statute specifically designed for international arbi–tration. The Florida International Arbitration Act, Chapter 684 of the Florida Statutes, entered into effect on October 1, 1986.

On April 2, 1987, California's new rules on licensing of foreign legal consultants came into effect, joining the foreign legal consultant rules in New York, the District of Columbia, Michigan, and Hawaii [Rule 988, Cal. Rules of Court; N.Y. Ct. App. R. for Licensing of Legal Consultants, 22 N.Y.C.R.R. Part 521; Rule 46 (c) (4), D.C. Ct. App.; Rule 5 (E), Mich. Bd. of L. Exam'rs; Rule 14, Sup. Ct. of Hawaii]. The California, New York and District of Columbia rules are reprinted here. In addition, a foreign legal consultants proposal is now under active consideration in Texas.

The table following this note summarizes the provisions of the five foreign legal consultant rules with regard to eligibility for admission, the scope of practice permitted the foreign legal consultant, and professional discipline. In the United States, it is unconstitutional for a state to deny admission to the bar by reason of citizenship (In re Griffiths, 413 U.S. 717 (1973). State residency requirements are also unconstitutional as applied to citizens of other states (Supreme Court of New Hampshire v. Piper, 470 U.S. 274 (1985). State bar examination pass rates range from 40% to 99%; a substantial number of foreign lawyers have been admitted to the bar by passing the bar examination. As of June 1, 1987, over 70 foreign legal consultants had been licensed in New York, and none in other jurisdictions (one application was pending).

The Court of Cassation's decision in Sonatrach v. Migeon follows its 1984 decision in Eurodif Corporation v. Islamic Republic of Iran [23 I.L.M. 1062 (1984)] in helping Formulate a more cogent French position on sovereign immunity. In the Eurodif case, the Court of Cassation established that a state is not entitled to sovereign immunity from execution when the activity from which the claim arises is of an economic or commercial nature and the assets subject to execution relate to that activity. The Sonatrach decision goes beyond Eurodif in distinguishing between immunity of execution granted to a sovereign state and that granted to a state enterprise.

On January 6, 1987, the French Court of Cassation denied the petition for annulment of the decision rendered by the Paris Court of Appeals on July 12, 1984 [23 I.L.M. 1048 (1984)] which set aside the award rendered by an ICC Arbitral Tribunal on March 11, 1983 in the SPP v. The Arab Republic of Egypt case [22 I.L.M. 752 (1983)].

Ruling on the question of their own competence, the arbitrators accepted jurisdiction over the Arab Republic of Egypt on the ground that by affixing the words “approved, agreed and ratified” by the Minister of Tourism and the signature of the Minister of Tourism to a contract entered into “between” SPP and the Egyptian General Organization for Tourism and Hotels (EGOTH), the State had agreed to be bound by the ICC arbitration clause contained in that contract.

This decision follows an appeal of the May 1986 District Court decision [25 I.L.M. 771 (1986)] in which 145 consolidated personal injury claims were dismissed on the basis of forum non conveniens. The District Court conditioned its decision By requiring Union Carbide to consent to the jurisdiction of the Indian courts, to agree to any judgment of the Indian courts and to abide by U.S. pretrial procedural rules. The Court of Appeals addressed each of these conditions and modified the District Court's order. In the appeal, attorneys for the victims of the 1984 Bhopal gas leak challenged the decision to move the hearings to India, while Union Carbide contended that it is unfair to hold Union Carbide to different standards for discovery of evidence than India would have to follow in the Indian courts.

This decision follows an appeal of the May 1986 District Court decision [25 I.L.M. 771 (1986)] in which 145 consolidated personal injury claims were dismissed on the basis of forum non conveniens. The District Court conditioned its decision By requiring Union Carbide to consent to the jurisdiction of the Indian courts, to agree to any judgment of the Indian courts and to abide by U.S. pretrial procedural rules. The Court of Appeals addressed each of these conditions and modified the District Court's order. In the appeal, attorneys for the victims of the 1984 Bhopal gas leak challenged the decision to move the hearings to India, while Union Carbide contended that it is unfair to hold Union Carbide to different standards for discovery of evidence than India would have to follow in the Indian courts.

[Parties shall ensure confidentiality of the coordinates of deep seabed areas.]

[Confidentiality of coordinates (Art. 1) to be preserved for one year from receipt;other information for five years. Time can be extended by notice of continued commercial sensitivity.]

After two years of negotiations, representatives of the United States and twelve Pacific island states signed a five–year regional fisheries treaty that sets forth conditions on U.S. fishing in the region and will guarantee U.S. purchases of at least $1.75 million worth of fishing licenses annually. At the same time, the U.S. fishing industry will provide $250,000 in annual technical assistance to help the island states develop their own fishing industries. The treaty will enter into force after ratification by the United States and ten of the Pacific signatory states. Parties taking part in the negotiations but which have not yet signed the treaty include Niue, Palau, Tonga and Vanuatu.

In 1985, the U.N. Economic and Social Council determined that a group of experts with experience in family and child welfare should prepare a draft declaration and guidelines for governments on the foster placement and adoption of children. A draft had been considered by the General Assembly since 1979 and had been on the agenda of the Sixth Committee (Legal) since 1982. In 1985, the Assembly decided that the Sixth Committee should hold informal consultations to achieve agreement on the remaining issues, in particular the question of “the sole criterion” in Article 5 and the principle relating to the problem of child abduction for illicit placement. This was done, and the Declaration was adopted at the General Assembly's forty-first session.