To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The chapter examines the nature and the main characteristics of arbitral institutions and describes the main features of institutional arbitration. It then illustrates several categories of institutions, distinguishing them on the basis of various criteria. The chapter further describes the functions performed by arbitral institutions with respect to the specific cases submitted to them, their contribution to the making of arbitration law and their role in promoting the knowledge and culture of arbitration. The chapter further examines the notion of "mandatory institutional rules", i.e. rules that institutions do not accept derogations from, and illustrates the conditions for institutions' liability vis à vis the parties and the scope of their immunity in relation to acts and omissions in the performance of their functions under the rules The author concludes that, despite the importance of the functions carried out by institutions, their role does not entail any involvement in adjudicating disputes. The impact of institutions’ decisions on the outcome of cases is indirect, limited to procedural issues or limited to recommendations to arbitrators.
The multi-faceted role of arbitrators is complex and protean. While there is consensus on the fact that the nature of the international arbitrator’s role entails according the arbitrator wide-ranging powers and that the arbitrator also undertakes a panoply of obligations, the scope of these powers and duties is not always well defined. Views about the nature and scope of these powers and duties might diverge depending on whether arbitrators are seen as service providers, justice purveyors, or both. Following a brief overview of this core question, the contribution proceeds to identify the sources of an arbitrator’s powers. Next, the most important duties of international arbitrators, including those pertaining to ethical obligations, the need to ensure due process, the necessity to apply the proper law, the duty to provide a reasoned award, and several others are explored. This contribution also highlights the most important rights of international arbitrators, such as the right to receive good faith cooperation from the parties, as well as the rights to remuneration and immunity, amongst others. Finally, we make some observations on ways in which the rights and duties entailed by the complex mandate of arbitrators can be reconciled in the event of conflict.
This chapter deals with Germany’s position on State jurisdiction and immunities. The first part, Jurisdiction of the State, addresses Germany releasing an Iranian citizen in a prisoner swap, as well as Germany considering further US sanctions on Nord Stream 2, a pipeline project delivering gas from Russia to Germany, an encroachment on its sovereignty as it understands them to be extraterritorial in nature. The second part, State immunity, deals with the Federal Constitutional Court classifying Greek debt restructuring measures as acta iure imperii. While the chapter agrees with the decision, it criticizes the Federal Constitutional Court for missing the opportunity to advance the discussion of a contentious matter of public international law. Another article assesses Germany’s (non)participation in US court proceedings for alleged colonial genocide and enslavement of the Ovaherero and Nama in what was formerly known as South West Africa and is now Namibia. The chapter argues that Germany is not answerable and that Namibia’s position in its negotiations with the German government over a political declaration concerning atrocities committed during colonial rule was weakened.
The chapter provides an analysis of the concept of rights. It clarifies the precise object of inquiry of the book. A particular focus is repesented by claim rights or subjective rights. Mayor elements of the analysis of subjective rights are recalled, including historical contributions from Natural Law thinkers, comments by legal positivists, the Hohfeldian framework and the rules and principles approach. The question as to whether it is conceptually impossible to regard social rights as proper rights is addressed. Central elements of a concept of rights are discussed, including the addressees of rights, the holders of rights and the problem of group rights. The relation of legal and moral rights is a further object of inquiry, as are the basic contents of human rights, the copossibility and limitations of rights, the nature of obligations, the peremptory nature of rights and questions of the interpretation of rights.
After the winter of 2021/2022, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had reached a phase where a considerable number of people in Germany have been either infected with a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variant, vaccinated or both, the full extent of which was difficult to estimate, however, because infection counts suffer from under-reporting, and the overlap between the vaccinated and recovered subpopulations is unknown. Yet, reliable estimates regarding population-wide susceptibility were of considerable interest: Since both previous infection and vaccination reduce the risk of severe disease, a low share of immunologically naïve individuals lowers the probability of further severe outbreaks, given that emerging variants do not escape the acquired susceptibility reduction. Here, we estimate the share of immunologically naïve individuals by age group for each of the sixteen German federal states by integrating an infectious-disease model based on weekly incidences of SARS-CoV-2 infections in the national surveillance system and vaccine uptake, as well as assumptions regarding under-ascertainment. We estimate a median share of 5.6% of individuals in the German population have neither been in contact with vaccine nor any variant up to 31 May 2022 (quartile range [2.5%–8.5%]). For the adult population at higher risk of severe disease, this figure is reduced to 3.8% [1.6%–5.9%] for ages 18–59 and 2.1% [1.0%–3.4%] for ages 60 and above. However, estimates vary between German states mostly due to heterogeneous vaccine uptake. Excluding Omicron infections from the analysis, 16.3% [14.1%–17.9%] of the population in Germany, across all ages, are estimated to be immunologically naïve, highlighting the large impact the first two Omicron waves had until the beginning of summer in 2022. The method developed here might be useful for similar estimations in other countries or future outbreaks of other infectious diseases.
In this multicentre study, we compared the status of antibody production in healthcare personnel (HCP) before and after vaccination using different brands of COVID-19 vaccines between March 2021 and September 2021. Out of a total of 962 HCP enrolled in our study, the antibody against the S1 domain of SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 48.3%, 95.5% and 96.2% of them before, after the first and the second doses of the vaccines, respectively. Our results showed post-vaccination infection in 3.7% and 5.9% of the individuals after the first and second doses of vaccines, respectively. The infection was significantly lower in HCP who presented higher antibody titres before the vaccination. Although types of vaccines did not show a significant difference in the infection rate, a lower infection rate was recorded for AstraZeneca after the second vaccination course. This rate was equal among individuals receiving a second dose of Sinopharm and Sputnik. Vaccine-related side effects were more frequent among AstraZeneca recipients after the first dose and among Sputnik recipients after the second dose. In conclusion, our results showed diversity among different brands of COVID-19 vaccines; however, it seems that two doses of the vaccines could induce an antibody response in most of HCP. The induced immunity could persist for 3–5 months after the second vaccination course.
Antimicrobial resistance is a major threat to both human and animal health, but reduction of use raises issues of how standards of animal health and welfare can be maintained without them. This turns the spotlight onto the role of good management and higher standards of animal welfare as drug-free ways of improving immune function and increasing resistance to infection. Research is urgently needed into the relationship between animal welfare, immunity, gut microbiota and disease and we are not yet in a position to claim that improving welfare will improve resistance to disease. ‘Boosting’ the immune system is not straightforward and an interdisciplinary approach is needed.
What role do international organizations play in international law? Similar to states, they have international legal personality, responsibilities, and immunities. This chapter focuses on the preeminent global intergovernmental organization, the United Nations, and details the functions and limits of its principal organs. Special attention is given to the General Assembly, Security Council, and International Court of Justice. The European Union is the leading example of a regional, supranational organization, and its authority and institutions are discussed in detail as well. The chapter concludes with brief considerations of other major international organizations, including the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the Organization of American States, the African Union, and the World Health Organization.
How do we define the state in international law, and what is its relationship to individuals? We begin by outlining the state as a legal concept and differentiating it from similar concepts. We then explore the legal personality of the state under international law, including the elements of statehood, absolute and restrictive immunity, and state responsibility. The problems of state recognition (or non-recognition) of other states and governments is a key to understanding how states interact, as are changes in state status (e.g., secession or other consequential changes). The last half of the chapter is devoted to the reciprocal responsibilities state and individuals have toward one another, focusing on nationality, citizenship, refugees, statelessness, and the state’s treatment of foreign nationals.
How does international law impact the behavior of states? This book designed for students in multiple disciplines offers a comprehensive, accessible introduction to the 'law of nations,' detailing the evolution of state practice in response to an ever-changing, diverse world. In this new edition of William Slomanson's foundational text, the new authors, Professors Slagter and Van Doorn, trace how states manage their sovereignty in myriad ways, working through treaties, international organizations, and international courts to secure their own as well as global interests. With special emphasis on five key areas-human rights, the use of force, human security and humanitarian intervention, environmental protection, and economic relations-the authors illustrate both the power and limits of international law to provide structure and predictability on a globalized planet. Real-world problem sets, annotated bibliographies, and a practical guide to studying international law make this a text that students and instructors alike will appreciate.
Chapter 4 discusses various cultural constructions of physical difference: racialised phenotype, supposed medical predisposition or resistance to specific diseases and climes, and concepts of filthiness and hygiene. The eighteenth-century Navy was embedded into the structural racism of the Atlantic world and British empire, and many seamen suffered from this. Yet, unlike other institutions, it still rarely used ‘race’ as a systematic label to recruit, classify, or sift its workforce. Seamen were occasionally deployed according to climatic theories of national character and racialised constructions of disease and immunity. However, many naval surgeons still saw immunity as acquired rather than innate, and thus modifiable and dependent on a man’s most recent deployment, rather than intrinsic to ‘race’. Similarly, prejudice surrounding the cleanliness and attitudes of some groups of ‘foreigners’ was linked more to the administrative structures of foreign countries and navies than to essentialist understandings of the individuals themselves. Therefore, in the eyes of many officers, virtually any able man could be absorbed, reformed, and put to use by British naval discipline. This did not mitigate the violence and discrimination of everyday racism, but it highlights the somewhat levelling attitude of an administration bent on maximising its efficient exploitation of manpower.
Vitamin D is both a nutrient and a neurologic hormone that plays a critical role in modulating immune responses. While low levels of vitamin D are associated with increased susceptibility to infections and immune-related disorders, vitamin D supplementation has demonstrated immunomodulatory effects that can be protective against various diseases and infections. Vitamin D receptor is expressed in immune cells that have the ability to synthesise the active vitamin D metabolite. Thus, vitamin D acts in an autocrine manner in a local immunologic milieu in fighting against infections. Nutrigenetics and nutrigenomics are the new disciplines of nutritional science that explore the interaction between nutrients and genes using distinct approaches to decipher the mechanisms by which nutrients can influence disease development. Though molecular and observational studies have proved the immunomodulatory effects of vitamin D, only very few studies have documented the molecular insights of vitamin D supplementation. Until recently, researchers have investigated only a few selected genes involved in the vitamin D metabolic pathway that may influence the response to vitamin D supplementation and possibly disease risk. This review summarises the impact of vitamin D supplementation on immune markers from nutrigenetics and nutrigenomics perspective based on evidence collected through a structured search using PubMed, EMBASE, Science Direct and Web of Science. The research gaps and shortcomings from the existing data and future research direction of vitamin D supplementation on various immune-related disorders are discussed.
The chapter reports that the leniency programme in Hong Kong was promulgated at the same time that the Hong Kong Competition Ordinance went into full effect in 2015. This leniency programme has been successfully used once. The Hong Kong Competition Commission (HKCC) reached a leniency agreement in 2020, despite the strong focus of the HKCC on tackling cartels. Six out of the seven cases the HKCC has brought to the Hong Kong Competition Tribunal are cartel related. These enforcement successes are attributable to market studies of the HKCC itself. However, this situation should not be misinterpreted. With the arrival of Brent Snyder as the Chief Executive Officer of the HKCC, the leniency programme was revised. Lenient treatment remained limited to immunity, but also became available once an investigation has started. Two new schemes were introduced: leniency for individuals and leniency plus. A leniency applicant has also been given immunity from damages claims. Further, reduction was made possible through the introduction of a cooperation policy. These recent changes should contribute to enforcement and supplement the successfully concluded ex officio investigations.
The authors of this chapter argue that the Chinese legislator has infused a dose of trust and predictability into its leniency programme. The trust was necessary because not all enforcement agencies in China, of which the National Development and Reform Commission is most often singled out, applied due process during their investigation. Furthermore, predictability was required because the existing leniency programmes, one for price-related cartels and one for non-price-related cartels, gave too much discretion to the enforcement agencies. As a result of the lack of due process or predictability, the outcomes of investigations were uncertain. This chapter will show that, by reconfiguring the enforcement structure, both elements are addressed. There is one condition for the new leniency programme to be more effective. The new enforcement agency, the State Administration for Market Regulation, which has elaborated the new leniency programme, should ensure transparency in its decision making.
This chapter sheds light on the international organisations that have been active in proliferating leniency programmes. This contribution includes the efforts of the OECD, ICN, UNCTAD and ASEAN. For each of these organisations, the chapter argues that they have a tendency to look for the common elements among existing leniency programmes and present them as an international guideline or best practice. When the existing leniency programmes diverge, the international guideline or best practice is to offer options. By not further clarifying these options, the chapter holds, the international organisations do no more than summarise local practices and pull them outside of their context. Due to this practice, convergence is unlikely to happen because, when the international guidelines or best practices are consulted, there will be an automatic reflex to also consult existing local practices and the existing literature regarding those practices.
Directive 2014/104/EU introduced special rules on joint and several for those engaged in consensual dispute resolution, immunity recipients and small and medium enterprises. The aim of this Chapter is to outline the liability regime for these entities. The assessment starts with the analysis of policy arguments and the search for the logic behind the special rules on joint and several liability. It is asked whether the special treatment of privileged groups is justified and whether the rules provided by Directive 2014/104/EU meet the envisioned aims. Subsequently, the assessment takes a pragmatic angle and it is asked how the special regimes of joint and several liability operate in practice and how they can be improved. The analysis shows that Directive 2014/104/EU insufficiently shields immunity recipients from an extensive private law liability and the rules on joint and several liability call the effectiveness of leniency programmes into question. The Directive’s rules on consensual dispute resolution are also flawed. Given that there is no clear legal benchmark for dividing antitrust liability, the settling parties are virtually unable to determine which settlement offer to make and they can end up overcompensating or being undercompensated.
This chapter on the Singaporean leniency programme holds that various elements point to its effectiveness. The leniency programme guarantees immunity for a leniency applicant prior to an investigation, immunity could be obtained by the first leniency applicant once an investigation has started, and granting leniency to subsequent leniency applicants is at the discretion of the Singaporean enforcement agency, the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCCS). Furthermore, leniency plus, whereby extra reduction can be obtained for revealing participation in another cartel, and the fast-track procedure, whereby extra reduction can be obtained for admitting to the fact, have been introduced as well. It is now also possible for a cartel to be exposed through a reward or whistle-blowing scheme, though this scheme is not available for persons active in the infringement. Because of these elements, the leniency programme has contributed to eight of the fifteen cartel infringement decisions. Some of these cases have led to record high fines. Another element worth mentioning is that some of the leniency applications were only submitted after active solicitation by the CCCS.
The concluding chapter argues that the Asian leniency programmes only converge on the core elements of a leniency programme. The core elements are the building blocks of a leniency programme. However, the composition of these blocks is often different. Some of the differences are subtle. Other differences make the respective leniency programme distinct from the others. Some of the distinctive elements are not necessarily part of the building blocks any more and thus give a unique character to the respective leniency programme. This chapter further claims that these differences can be explained by either the political economy of a country, experimentation due to prior negative enforcement results and a desire to achieve better enforcement results, or foreign influence. Since the result of experimentation cannot always be predicted, the authors estimate that further amendments will be made to the Asian leniency programmes.
In response to cartel formation, competition lawyers and policymakers in nine Asian jurisdictions have experimented with leniency programmes. This mechanism allows firms to come forward with information in relation to their illegal cartel participation in return for a reduction of or immunity from a sanction. The experimentation plays out across three different dimensions: the revision of early adopted leniency programmes, the introduction of newly written leniency programmes, and the decision – deliberate or otherwise – not to create a leniency programme. This volume is the first to analyse the empirical evidence across a number of countries to determine how effective these measures have been, and how they have been amended in response to problems encountered. In this volume, local experts from key Asian jurisdictions, together with international experts, offer an introduction to this fast-developing field, and explore the theoretical, international and regulatory contexts of leniency programmes.
The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, first notified in China, has spread around the world causing high morbidity and mortality, which is due to factors such as the subversion of the immune response. The aims of the study are to summarise and present the immunopathological relationship of COVID-19 with innate immunity. This is a systematic review conducted by the National Library of Medicine – National Institutes of Health, USA (PUBMED), Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS), Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE) and Scientific Electronic Library Online (SCIELO) databases with clinical trials, in vitro assays, case-controls, cohort studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses between February 2020 and July 2021. The version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for RCTs (RoB 2), Joana Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal (for the review articles) and the Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tools were used to evaluate the quality and the risk of bias of the studies included in this review. The innate immune response through the generation of interferons, alternative pathways and complement system lectins and the joint action of innate immune cells and cytokines and chemokines lead to different clinical outcomes, taking into account the exacerbated inflammatory response and pathogenesis. Then, in addition to interacting as a bridge for adaptive immunity, the innate immune response plays an essential role in primary defense and is one of the starting points for immune evasion by SARS-CoV-2.