All future 2012 events
|Patenting of genes |
13 February 2012
Should corporations have the right to patent your genes and our crops? Our government thinks they do. Around the world, large corporations have been developing genetically modified (GM) seeds, patenting them and aggressively protecting their rights, while other corporations have been patenting human genes.
Lawyers can claim 1.5 CLE points for this session.
Refreshments will be served from 5.30pm.
Supported by The Truefood Network, Sydney Centre for International Law, 3dots Studio and Transition Bondi.
|The privileges and immunities of international organisations |
16 February 2012
The privileges and immunities of international organisations - the adoption of the Waite and Kennedy Doctrine by Domestic Courts
Most constituent instruments of international organisations provide that they shall enjoy those privileges and immunities which are necessary for the fulfilment of their purposes or functions. Because separate multilateral privileges and immunities agreements often provide for unqualified 'immunity from legal process' international organizations usually enjoy de facto absolute immunity from suit. In its 1999 landmark judgment Waite and Kennedyv. Germany (and Beer and Regan v. Germany), the European Court of Human Rights held that the right of access to court under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights might be restricted for legitimate purposes, such as protecting the independent functioning of an international organisation. However, such limitations were only legitimate and permissible if they were proportionate. In the Court's view, the proportionality of the grant of immunity depended upon the availability of 'reasonable alternative means.'
Over the last decade, this reasoning was followed by a number of domestic courts in Europe, which increasingly questioned the wide-ranging jurisdictional immunities of international organization. The influence of the Waite and Kennedy judgment is particularly fascinating in an area where traditional immunities under public international and human rights clash at a time of increasing calls for more accountability of international organisations. It also demonstrates the growing willingness of domestic courts to engage in applying and interpreting international law.
About the Speaker
August Reinisch is professor of international and European law at the University of Vienna. He currently serves as arbitrator on the In Rem Restitution Panel according to the Austrian General Settlement Fund Law 2001 on a pro bono basis. As of 2010 he is Dean for International Relations of the Law School of the University of Vienna.
His professional experience includes acting as expert adviser in Austrian and foreign court litigation as well as international arbitration; he was a Member of the ILA Committee on International Law on Foreign Investment, and he is a member of the ILA Study Groups on Accountability of International Organisations, State Insolvency, and the Role of Soft-Law Instruments in International Investment Law. He is president of the Austrian Branch of the ILA, Executive Board member of the European Society of International Law and of the German Society of International Law, as well as member of ASIL, ACUNS and other professional associations in the field of international law.
He has published widely in international law with a recent focus on international investment law, the law of international organizations, international responsibility, human rights and non-state actors.
August Reinisch holds Master's degrees in philosophy (1990) and in law (1988) as well as a doctorate in law (1991) from the University of Vienna and an LL.M. (1989) from NYU Law School. He is admitted to the Bar of New York and Connecticut (since 1990).
|International Law and the Periphery |
17 February 2012 to 19 February 2012
Call for Papers and Panel Proposals - Conference
This conference will enable scholars of law and related disciplines to revisit core-periphery dynamics in global governance, in both their symbolic and their material dimensions, and contribute to their re-imagining for the current age.
|Religious Pluralism versus Social Cohesion? |
22 February 2012
Religious Pluralism versus Social Cohesion?
Normative Fault Lines of Human Rights Jurisprudence in Europe
Daniel Augenstein will present this lunchtime seminar exploring the tension between religious pluralism and social cohesion in European human rights jurisprudence. Comparing the German, French and British interpretation of the "social cohesion limitation‟ of freedom of religion it contends that, at the national level, concerns for social cohesion stem from negative to defensive attitudes towards religious diversity that are difficult to square with the normative premises of religious pluralism in a democratic society. The talk will go on todiscuss the relationship between religious pluralism and social cohesion in the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. The analysis suggests that the diversity of national approaches to social cohesion prevents the Court from ensuring an effective European protection of religious pluralism.
Dr. Daniel Augenstein works as Assistant Professor at Tilburg University in the Netherlands. Prior to joining Tilburg, he held appointments at the School of Law of the University of Edinburgh (UK) and at the Free University of Bolzano (Italy). Daniel's research focusses on comparative and international human rights jurisprudence. Main research interests include tolerance, religion and trans-nationalism, the politics of human rights, and business and human rights.
|The inter-American system for the protection of human rights: challenges for the future |
23 February 2012
Speaker:Claudio Grossman, Dean
American University Washington College of Law
To register click here
The Inter-American system for the protection of human rights involves norms of institutions that establish human rights obligations and supervisory organs for the 35 nations of the Western hemisphere. This presentation will examine the role of the system throughout history in fighting dictatorships and authoritarian regimes, within the process of democratic transitions, and in addressing challenges that lie ahead. It will also examine the methodologies utilized by the system,e.g.,visitsin loco,cases, the role of the supervisory organs within the context of a vibrant civil society, and the system's role in addressing issues such as impunity, the rights of vulnerable groups, due process and political rights, among others. The presentation will further examine the continuing validity and legitimacy of the human rights tradition vis-à-vis the expansion and implementation of rights.
CLAUDIO GROSSMAN is the Dean of American University Washington College of Law, Professor of Law and the Raymond Geraldson Scholar for International and Humanitarian Law. Since his appointment as Dean in 1995, WCL has further developed its intellectual creativity, pursuing numerous and exciting initiatives such as dual degree programs, summer and semester abroad programs, local summer programs and institutes, the LL.M. in Law and Government Program, LL.M. in Advocacy, new LL.M. specializations, joint LLM/MBA degree, the S.J.D. Program, the Supervised Externship Program, the Center on International Commercial Arbitration, the Intellectual Property Program, new clinics, and integrated sections and electives within the first year curriculum.
Dean Grossman is currently the Chair of the United Nations Committee against Torture. He is a member of the Governing Board of the International Association of Law Schools, member of the Board of the Inter-American Institute of Human Rights, and member of the International Objectives Committee of the Association of American Law Schools. Grossman is also serving as a referee in peer review evaluations for the European Research CouncilDedicated Implementation Structure, under the Ideas Specific Programme, until 2013. He was a member of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights from 1993-2001, where he served in numerous capacities including President (1996-97; 2001), the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Women (1996-2000), and the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Populations (2000-2001). Dean Grossman is the author of numerous publications regarding international law and human rights and the recipient of numerous awards for his work in those fields including the 2010 Henry W. Edgerton Civil Liberties Award from the American Civil Liberties Union of the National Capital Area and the 2012 Deborah L. Rhode Award from the Association of American Law Schools' Section on Pro Bono and Public Service Opportunities.
|International Economic Law Interest Group Research Symposium |
2 March 2012
Click herefor secure online payment and regsitration.
Jointly convened by the ANZSIL International Economic Law Interest Group and the Sydney Centre for International Law at the Faculty of Law, University of Sydney.
This symposium will entail presentation of current scholarship and research in international economic law. The goal of this symposium is to promote and facilitate discussion of works in progress relating to international economic law.
The key note speaker (by skype) will be Professor Alan Sykes of Stanford University Law School, speaking on theEconomic Structure of Renegotiation and Dispute Settlement in the WTO.
Lawyers/barristers: attendance at this seminar is equal to6.5 MCLE/CPD unit.
|Book Launch: Legal Pluralism and Development |
23 July 2012
To register, please click here.
The Sydney Law School and The World Bank are pleased to invite you to the launch ofLegal Pluralism and Development: Scholars and Practitioners in Dialogue(Cambridge University Press 2012) edited by Michael Woolcock and Caroline Sage (The World Bank) and Brian Z. Tamanaha (Washington University School of Law).
ABOUT THE BOOK:
Previous efforts at legal development have focused almost exclusively on state legal systems, many of which have shown little improvement over time. Recently, organizations engaged in legal development activities have begun to pay greater attention to the implications of local, informal, indigenous, religious, and village courts or tribunals, which often are more efficacious than state legal institutions, especially in rural communities. Legal pluralism is the term applied to these situations because these institutions exist alongside official state legal systems, usually in a complex or uncertain relationship. Although academics, especially legal anthropologists and sociologists, have discussed legal pluralism for decades, their work has not been consulted in the development context. Similarly, academics have failed to benefit from the insights of development practitioners. This book brings together, in a single volume, contributions from academics and practitioners to explore the implications of legal pluralism for legal development. All of the practitioners have extensive experience in development projects, the academics come from a variety of backgrounds, and most have written extensively on legal pluralism and on development.
Copies of the book can bepurchased via Cambridge University Press.
|The Application of Public International Law to Cyber War: an Adequate Legal Framework? |
2 August 2012
Register Online To register and make your secure online payment, please click here
This seminar will explore the question of whether cyber attacks are prohibited under international law, given both the inherent hostility and their ability to generate grave destruction. Since the dawn of the Information Age states have become highly dependent upon computer technology in order to effectively regulate their societies. This dependency, however, has been recognised by both hostile states and belligerent non-state actors, who have increasingly sought to target computer servers and the information that they hold. Whilst a cyber attack that causes a plane to crash or opens the gates of a dam would certainly produce physical damage and thus constitute an unlawful use of force, the issue is that many cyber attacks will not produce such damage. Cyber attacks can interrupt government communications, cripple a state's financial sector or disable its military defence systems without manifesting physical damage. The wealth of current academic literature invariably concludes that such cyber attacks do not constitute an unlawful use of force and thus fall outside the international regulatory framework. This is considered wholly unsatisfactory because of the devastating impact that cyber attacks can yield, regardless that this damage is non-physical in nature. International law is thus lambasted by contemporary cyber war literature for being outdated and deficient. Dr Russell Buchan from the University of Sheffield disagrees with this common position and believes that cyber attacks are coercive in nature and amount to unlawful intervention under customary international law, constituting an internationally wrongful act. Dr Buchan will be joined by Dr Emily Crawford from the Sydney Law School who will discuss current issues for the law of armed conflict with regards to hostilities in cyberspace and examine some current State practices relevant to cyber warfare.
About the speakers:
Dr Russell Buchan holds an LLB (Hons) degree in Law, an LLM in Public Law and a PhD in International Law. Russell has published widely in leading academic journals in the field of public international law, with his focus being on collective security, international criminal law, international humanitarian law and cyber war. Russell will publish a monograph in 2012 with Hart Publishing entitled 'International Law and the Construction of the Liberal Peace'. Russell is also currently the editor of the annual Special Issue of the International Community Law Review. Dr Buchan was recently awarded a research fellowship to visit the University of Sydney to undertake research. While here, he will be concentrating on completing his upcoming monograph which relates to the international protection of fundamental human rights.
Dr Emily Crawfordis a post-doctoral fellow and associate at the Sydney Centre for International Law (SCIL). Previously at the Law Faculty at the University of New South Wales, Emily completed her Arts and Law degrees before working as a researcher at the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, before returning to UNSW to undertake her PhD. Her doctoral thesis on the disparate treatment of participants in armed conflicts was published by Oxford University Press in 2010. Emily has taught international law and international humanitarian law, and has delivered lectures both locally and overseas on international humanitarian law issues, including the training of military personnel on behalf of the Red Cross in Australia. A member of the International Law Association's Committee on Non-State Actors, as well as the NSW Red Cross IHL Committee, Emily's current research project is looking at major developments in the conduct of armed conflicts in the 21st century, such as cyber warfare and targeted assassinations, and the implications for both domestic and international law.
|Book Launch: Climate Change and Australia |
9 August 2012
CLIMATE CHANGE is one of the most hotly debated issues of this century.
|International Law and Remote Attacks in Armed Conflicts |
5 September 2012
To register for this event click here.
This seminar will look at whether remote attack challenges the law of armed conflict or is it the other way round with the law challenging remote attack? The presentation looks at a number of examples of remote attack, namely unmanned drone attacks, autonomous attacks using unmanned technologies, cyber warfare and attack in outer space. The seminar then looks at the question of liability issues when remote attacks go wrong, considering first criminal liability and then the liability to compensate as provided for in the law of armed conflict, with reference to the position of software/weapons designers.
About the speaker
Air Cdre William Boothby (ret.) has served in the RAF and well as the UK government, and is an expert on the law of armed conflict, serving as Deputy Director of Legal Services in the RAF, prior to his retirement in 2011. He has specific interests in the law on weapons and targeting, and was member of the Group of Experts that examined the question of Direct Participation in Hostilities convened by the ICRC, as well as the Group of Experts preparing and drafting the Tallinn Manual on Cyber Warfare, convened under the auspices of the NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence. He teaches at the Royal Holloway College of the University of London, at the Geneva Centre for Security Policy and at the Australian National University. His degrees/qualifications are BA in Economics, 1973 at Kent University in UK, qualified Solicitor in 1977, and PhD in international law at the University of Frankfurt (Oder) in Germany in 2008. His first book on'Weapons and the Law of Armed Conflict'was published in 2009 by OUP. His second book, The Law of Targeting, is to be published in August 2012 by the same publisher.
Lawyers/barristers: attendance at this lecture is equal to 1 MCLE/CPD unit.
|International Arbitration in UNCITRAL Model Law Jurisdictions |
13 September 2012
International Arbitration in UNCITRAL Model Law Jurisdictions: Comparing Recent Developments in Japan
Hosted by: Clifford Chance, Level 16, No. 1 O'Connell Street, Sydney
Registration is free but places are limited: RSVP by 7 September to email@example.com
Organized by: Sydney Law School - Centre for Asian and Pacific Law (CAPLUS), Australian Network for Japanese Law (ANJeL) & Sydney Centre for International Law (SCIL)
Supported by: Australian Centre for International Commercial Arbitration (ACICA), Australasian Forum for International Arbitration (AFIA.asia), Australian International Disputes Centre (AIDC), Chartered Institute of Arbitrators - Australia (CIArb), Japan Commercial Arbitration Centre (JCAA)
Overview: This seminar will discuss recent case law and other topics related to international commercial arbitration in Japan, of particular interest from an Australian perspective, including: the standard of reasoning required from arbitrators, challenges to awards based on public policy or inability to present one's case, time limits for bringing challenges, interim measures, enforceability of multi-tiered dispute resolution agreements, confidentiality, and "Arb-Med" (legal and practical issues involved when arbitrators facilitate settlement, as is still quite frequent in Japan).
The seminar will also touch on some developments in other jurisdictions that have adopted the UNCITRAL Model Law for their arbitration legislation, especially the recent decision regarding Arb-Med rendered by the Hong Kong Court of Appeal in Gao Hai Yan & Anor v Keeneye Holdings Ltd & Ors  HKEC 514. This will build on discussion from a 20 July seminar in Tokyo involving Dr J Romesh Weeramantry and the present speaker and commentator.
The seminar will also briefly consider the differing policy stances towards incorporating investor-state arbitration provisions in investment treaties adopted by Japan (positive) and Australia (now negative), and some implications for ongoing bilateral Free Trade Agreement and Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations.
Speaker: Professor Tatsuya Nakamura specializes in international dispute resolution and ADR, especially arbitration. He is Professor of Law at Kokushikan University in Tokyo and General Manger of Arbitration Department of the Japan Commercial Arbitration Association. His publications include Japanese Arbitration Law Q&A (2004), International Business Disputes - Arbitration, Mediation and Negotiation (2012), and many articles and books in Japanese and English - including a chapter (with Luke Nottage) on Japan in Tom Ginsburg et al (eds) Arbitration in Asia (3rd ed. 2102, also at http://ssrn.com/author=488525). Prof Nakamura helped enact Japan's Arbitration Law 2003, as a member of the Consultative Committee of Experts on Arbitration for the Japanese Government's Office for Promotion of Justice System Reform of the Japanese Government. He is also on the International Arbitrators Panel of the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board.
Commentator: Dr Luke Nottage specialises in comparative and transnational business law (especially arbitration, contract law, and consumer product safety law). He is Associate Dean and Professor of Comparative and Transnational Business Law at Sydney Law School, ANJeL co-director, and director of Japanese Law Links Pty Ltd. Publications include International Arbitration in Australia (2010), Foreign Investment and Dispute Resolution in Asia (2011), and (at http://ssrn.com/author=488525) a paper summarising and identifying trends in recent case law under the International Arbitration Act 1974 (Cth). Luke has executive roles in ACICA (Rules Committee), AFIA (Council) a nd the Law Council of Australia (ILS). He is presently involved in a Japan-related arbitration in London, and has consulted for law firms world-wide, the EC, the OECD, the UNDP and the Japanese government. Luke is leading a research project (including Prof Nakamura) on "Fostering a Common Culture in Cross-Border Dispute Resolution: Australia, Japan and the Asia-Pacific", funded by the (DFAT-affiliated) Australia-Japan Foundation.
Chair: Tim Grave is a partner in Clifford Chance's Sydney office, specialising in commercial dispute resolution and related advice across a wide range of matters, including Corporations Act matters, directors duties, commercial and contractual disputes, equitable claims, trade practices, and investigations by regulators. In the last 12 months Tim has acted in two international arbitration related matters in the Federal Court. The first involved acting for a European applicant in successfully obtaining recognition and enforcement of a foreign arbitral award that was opposed by the Indian respondent. The second involved acting for Russian respondents in the first application in Australia for interim relief under the Model Law by way of freezing orders against the respondents' Australian assets.
|The Durkheimian spell of international criminal law |
20 September 2012
"The regime knows it. That is why it does not hesitate to torture, to kill, to bombard. The regime knows that nobody will do anything. We are alone."J., an imprisoned opponent to the Syrian government spoke in Bab al-Musala in May 2012, while the 10th anniversary celebrations of the ICC Statute were being prepared in The Hague. The penalisation of the "most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole" by the Rome Statute is at times seen as emanating from an absolute moral sentiment shared internationally, reminiscent of Émile Durkheim's (1858-1917) way to see a society's "conscience collective" directly expressed in law, the law thus enjoying acceptance from all albeit pathological elements of the society. Durkheim's thinking on law appears pregnant with absences: of choices, individual will and agency, inclusions and exclusions, of relevance of economical or structural phenomenon. The ideology of international criminal law, representing a moral ideal of international solidarity, presupposes an absence of the need to make political choices in exercising authority, demonstrating power, cementing an order. Durkheim saw a religious origin or quality in all social phenomena, including criminal law, and its consequentalist aims had little role in his thinking: the core function of criminal justice lay in collective sentiments, group coherence, the ritualistic, even the performative. Echoes of this are perceptible in current views on international criminal law as having - more than preventive effects - heterogeneous positive functions in a community, be it local or global: attending to desires of retribution, bringing closure, expressing values, establishing a historical record, contributing to peace. The paper observes the international criminal law under its Durkheimian spell and asks: What happened from moral to law: why does J. feel alone? Where are the absentees? And who is playing those drums?
About the speaker
Dr Immi Tallgren is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Erik Castrén Institute of International Law and Human Rights, University of Helsinki (Finland) working in the fields of international criminal law, international human rights law, legal anthropology, law & literature. Dr Tallgren's interdisciplinary research draws upon her background as a diplomat advising the Finnish government and her work with a range of international and regional organisations, including the European Space Agency and Europol.
|International Legal Practice |
28 September 2012
About the seminar
What are the characteristics of international legal practice in our time?
These changes put increasing pressure on existing professionals in the field and open up new opportunities for younger lawyers and scholars - among whom Australians are very much present. Professor Crawford will review both the pressures and the opportunities and will answer questions.
Professor James Crawford SC LLD FBA, is Whewell Professor of International Law and a Fellow of Jesus College at the University of Cambridge. He was a Member of the United Nations International Law Commission from 1992-2001 and Special Rapporteur on State Responsibility (1997-2001). In addition to scholarly work on statehood, self-determination, collective rights and international responsibility, he has appeared frequently before the International Court of Justice including in the Advisory Opinions on Nuclear Weapons (1996) and the Israeli Wall/Barrier (2004). He has also appeared before other international tribunals, and is actively engaged as an international arbitrator. Professor Crawford was a member of the Australian Law Reform Commission between 1982 and 1984, and produced reports on a range of topics including foreign state immunity. Professor Crawford was Dean of the Sydney Law School between 1990 and 1992.