LEADER 03910nam  22007092  450 
001 9910455085203321
005 20151005020622.0
010   $a1-107-19880-1
010   $a0-511-69973-5
010   $a1-107-63374-5
010   $a1-282-33679-7
010   $a9786612336799
010   $a0-511-63456-0
010   $a0-511-63500-1
010   $a0-511-63279-7
010   $a0-511-63158-8
010   $a0-511-63399-8
035   $a(CKB)1000000000804283
035   $a(EBL)461176
035   $a(OCoLC)609845848
035   $a(SSID)ssj0000342509
035   $a(PQKBManifestationID)11231037
035   $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000342509
035   $a(PQKBWorkID)10285686
035   $a(PQKB)11399100
035   $a(UkCbUP)CR9780511635458
035   $a(MiAaPQ)EBC461176
035   $a(Au-PeEL)EBL461176
035   $a(CaPaEBR)ebr10349786
035   $a(CaONFJC)MIL233679
035   $a(EXLCZ)991000000000804283
100   $a20090923d2009||||  uy|            0
101 0 $aeng
135   $aur|||||||||||
181   $ctxt$2rdacontent
182   $cc$2rdamedia
183   $acr$2rdacarrier
200 04$aThe role of domestic courts in treaty enforcement $ea comparative study /$fedited by David Sloss$b[electronic resource]
210  1$aCambridge :$cCambridge University Press,$d2009.
215   $a1 online resource (xxix, 626 pages) $cdigital, PDF file(s)
300   $aTitle from publisher's bibliographic system (viewed on 05 Oct 2015).
311   $a0-511-63545-1 
311   $a0-521-87730-X 
320   $aIncludes bibliographical references and index.
327   $tTreaty enforcement in domestic courts : a comparative analysis /$rDavid Sloss --$tDoes international law obligate states to open their national courts to persons for the invocation of treaty norms that protect or benefit persons? /$rSean D. Murphy --$tAustralia /$rDonald R. Rothwell --$tCanada /$rGib van Ert --$tGermany /$rAndreas L. Paulus --$tIndia /$rNihal Jayawickrama --$tIsrael /$rDavid Kretzmer --$tThe Netherlands /$rAndre? Nollkaemper --$tPoland /$rLech Garlicki, Ma?gorzata Masternak-Kubiak, and Krzysztof Wo?jtowicz --$tRussian Federation /$rWilliam E. Butler --$tSouth Africa /$rJohn Dugard --$tUnited Kingdom /$rAnthony Aust --$tUnited States /$rDavid Sloss --$tThe role of domestic courts in treaty enforcement : summary and conclusions /$rMichael P. Van Alstine.
330   $aThis book examines the application of treaties by domestic courts in twelve countries. The central question is whether domestic courts actually provide remedies to private parties who are harmed by a violation of their treaty-based rights. The analysis shows that domestic courts in eight of the twelve countries - Australia, Canada, Germany, India, the Netherlands, Poland, South Africa, and the United Kingdom - generally do enforce treaty-based rights on behalf of private parties. On the other hand, the evidence is mixed for the other four countries: China, Israel, Russia, and the United States. In China, Israel, and Russia, the trends are moving in the direction of greater judicial enforcement of treaties on behalf of private parties. The United States is the only country surveyed where the trend is moving in the opposite direction. US courts' reluctance to enforce treaty-based rights undermines efforts to develop a more cooperative global order.
606   $aTreaties
606   $aInternational and municipal law
606   $aJurisdiction
606   $aJurisdiction (International law)
615  0$aTreaties.
615  0$aInternational and municipal law.
615  0$aJurisdiction.
615  0$aJurisdiction (International law)
676   $a341.3/7
702   $aSloss$b David
801  0$bUkCbUP
801  1$bUkCbUP
906   $aBOOK
912   $a9910455085203321
996   $aThe role of domestic courts in treaty enforcement$91905647
997   $aUNINA