Decisions of international courts and arbitrators, as well as judgments of national courts, are fundamental elements of modern public international law. International Law Reports is the only publication in the world wholly devoted to the regular and systematic reporting in English of such decisions. It is therefore an absolutely essential work of reference. Volume 164 reports on, amongst others, the 2012 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice in Judgment No 2867 of the Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organization upon a Complaint Filed against the…mehr
Decisions of international courts and arbitrators, as well as judgments of national courts, are fundamental elements of modern public international law. International Law Reports is the only publication in the world wholly devoted to the regular and systematic reporting in English of such decisions. It is therefore an absolutely essential work of reference. Volume 164 reports on, amongst others, the 2012 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice in Judgment No 2867 of the Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organization upon a Complaint Filed against the International Fund for Agricultural Development, together with the related judgments of the ILO Administrative Tribunal, the 2015 judgment of the Federal Court of Australia in Ure v. Commonwealth of Australia and the 2013 United States Supreme Court decision in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.Hinweis: Dieser Artikel kann nur an eine deutsche Lieferadresse ausgeliefert werden.
1. S. G. v. International Fund for Agricultural Development (Judgment No. 2867) [INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANIZATION ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL]; 2. S. G. v. International Fund for Agricultural Development (Judgment No. 3003) [INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANIZATION ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL]; 3. Judgment No. 2867 of the Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organization upon a Complaint Filed against the International Fund for Agricultural Development [INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]; 4. S. G. v. International Fund for Agricultural Development (Judgment No. 3152) [INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANIZATION ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL]; 5. Commission of the European Communities v. Belgium (Case C-437/04) [COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (FIRST CHAMBER)]; 6. Lautsi and Others v. Italy (Application No. 30814/06) [EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS (GRAND CHAMBER)]; 7. Choudhary v. Canada (Communication No. 1898/2009) [UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE]; 8. Al-Gertani v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (Communication No. 1955/2010) [UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE]; 9. X v. Denmark (Communication No. 2007/2010) [UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE]; 10. Ure v. Commonwealth of Australia and Director of National Parks ([2015] FCA 241) [AUSTRALIA, FEDERAL COURT]; 11. La Générale des Carrières et Des Mines v. FG Hemisphere Associates LLC ([2012] UKPC 27) [JERSEY, JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL]; 12. Regina (Hassan) v. Secretary of State for Defence ([2009] EWHC 309 (Admin)) [ENGLAND, HIGH COURT, QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION (ADMINISTRATIVE COURT)]; 13. Wilhelm Finance Inc v. Ente Administrador del Astillero Rio Santiago ([2009] EWHC 1074 (Comm)) [ENGLAND, HIGH COURT, QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION (ADMINISTRATIVE COURT)]; 14. Republic of Croatia v. Republic of Serbia ([2009] EWHC 1559 (Ch)) [ENGLAND, HIGH COURT, CHANCERY DIVISION]; 15. Al Hassan-Daniel and Another v. Revenue and Customs Commissioners (Justice Intervening) ([2010] EWCA Civ 1443) [ENGLAND, COURT OF APPEAL]; 16. Assange v. Swedish Prosecution Authority (No. 1) ([2012] UKSC 22) [UNITED KINGDOM, SUPREME COURT]; 17. Chabad v. Russian Federation and Others [UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA]; 18. Chafin v. Chafin [UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT]; 19. Kiobel and Others v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. and Others [UNITED STATES, SUPREME COURT]; 20. Bond v. United States [UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT].
1. S. G. v. International Fund for Agricultural Development (Judgment No. 2867) [INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANIZATION ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL]; 2. S. G. v. International Fund for Agricultural Development (Judgment No. 3003) [INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANIZATION ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL]; 3. Judgment No. 2867 of the Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organization upon a Complaint Filed against the International Fund for Agricultural Development [INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]; 4. S. G. v. International Fund for Agricultural Development (Judgment No. 3152) [INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANIZATION ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL]; 5. Commission of the European Communities v. Belgium (Case C-437/04) [COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (FIRST CHAMBER)]; 6. Lautsi and Others v. Italy (Application No. 30814/06) [EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS (GRAND CHAMBER)]; 7. Choudhary v. Canada (Communication No. 1898/2009) [UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE]; 8. Al-Gertani v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (Communication No. 1955/2010) [UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE]; 9. X v. Denmark (Communication No. 2007/2010) [UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE]; 10. Ure v. Commonwealth of Australia and Director of National Parks ([2015] FCA 241) [AUSTRALIA, FEDERAL COURT]; 11. La Générale des Carrières et Des Mines v. FG Hemisphere Associates LLC ([2012] UKPC 27) [JERSEY, JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL]; 12. Regina (Hassan) v. Secretary of State for Defence ([2009] EWHC 309 (Admin)) [ENGLAND, HIGH COURT, QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION (ADMINISTRATIVE COURT)]; 13. Wilhelm Finance Inc v. Ente Administrador del Astillero Rio Santiago ([2009] EWHC 1074 (Comm)) [ENGLAND, HIGH COURT, QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION (ADMINISTRATIVE COURT)]; 14. Republic of Croatia v. Republic of Serbia ([2009] EWHC 1559 (Ch)) [ENGLAND, HIGH COURT, CHANCERY DIVISION]; 15. Al Hassan-Daniel and Another v. Revenue and Customs Commissioners (Justice Intervening) ([2010] EWCA Civ 1443) [ENGLAND, COURT OF APPEAL]; 16. Assange v. Swedish Prosecution Authority (No. 1) ([2012] UKSC 22) [UNITED KINGDOM, SUPREME COURT]; 17. Chabad v. Russian Federation and Others [UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA]; 18. Chafin v. Chafin [UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT]; 19. Kiobel and Others v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. and Others [UNITED STATES, SUPREME COURT]; 20. Bond v. United States [UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT].
Es gelten unsere Allgemeinen Geschäftsbedingungen: www.buecher.de/agb
Impressum
www.buecher.de ist ein Shop der buecher.de GmbH & Co. KG Bürgermeister-Wegele-Str. 12, 86167 Augsburg Amtsgericht Augsburg HRA 13309
