LSE Law Review

In Doctrinal Limbo: Enforcing Annulled Arbitral Awards Under the New York Convention

Abstract Article V(1)(e) of the New York Convention appears to preserve a margin of discretion for courts of contracting states to refuse the enforcement of an arbitral award if it has been annulled at the court of the seat of arbitration. It does so, however, without further guidance as to when this discretion should be […]

In Doctrinal Limbo: Enforcing Annulled Arbitral Awards Under the New York Convention Read More »

Going Out on a Third Limb: The Problem of the Law of Insanity’s Insistence on Insane Delusions over Irresistible Impulses.

Leave a Comment / Bo Jia Zhang, Criminal Law / LSE Law Review

Abstract The insanity rules in England and Wales are potentially per incuriam. While the modern interpretation of the M’Naghten rules recognises the Cognitive and Wrongfulness Limbs, a third Control Limb should be available to cover those whose mental illness manifests irresistible impulses to commit crimes. This third limb was contemplated by judges before and since M’Naghten. It is

Going Out on a Third Limb: The Problem of the Law of Insanity’s Insistence on Insane Delusions over Irresistible Impulses. Read More »

The Ramifications of State Conceptualisation on Contemporary Manifestations of Judicial Review

Leave a Comment / Angelina Koval, Public Law / LSE Law Review

Abstract This note will comparatively analyse the contested existence and development of the state and administrative law of the UK and France, subsequently using this historical perspective to evaluate the contemporary efficacy of judicial review in curtailing bureaucratic excess. The two nations reflect divergent models of state, England epitomising a traditionally ‘state-less’ notion, with France

The Ramifications of State Conceptualisation on Contemporary Manifestations of Judicial Review Read More »

Constitutional Adaptation in Europe’s New Age

Leave a Comment / António Vale, Public Law / LSE Law Review

Abstract The EU, like any other legal or political framework, is relevant insofar as it is capable of adapting to the needs and challenges that it faces. While this is accepted by its different branches, it has generally been shy in endorsing the significant, structural change that it requires, rather opting for short-term, sticking plaster

Constitutional Adaptation in Europe’s New Age Read More »

A Look at the ICC’s Philippines Decision: Is a Preliminary Examination enough for the Court to retain jurisdiction?

Leave a Comment / Dhun Vinod Santosh, International Law / LSE Law Review

Abstract This article aims to build a case in favour of the minority decision in the ICC’s Philippines judgment. The decision has been a source of contention amongst international law scholars, and various reasons have been provided for both a wide and restricted interpretation of Article 127 of the Rome Statute. This article aims to

A Look at the ICC’s Philippines Decision: Is a Preliminary Examination enough for the Court to retain jurisdiction? Read More »

Two Worlds Collide? Exploring the Role and Significance of tikanga Māori in Smith v Fonterra Co-Operative Group Ltd [2024] NZSC 5

Leave a Comment / Alec Chen, Private Law / LSE Law Review

Abstract This case note examines the New Zealand Supreme Court decision in Smith v Fonterra Co-Operative Group Ltd [2024] NZSC 5. It explores the broader relationship between tikanga Māori and common law, highlighting the legal uncertainty surrounding how – and to what extent – tikanga Māori should influence New Zealand common law, particularly in tort

Two Worlds Collide? Exploring the Role and Significance of tikanga Māori in Smith v Fonterra Co-Operative Group Ltd [2024] NZSC 5 Read More »

Al-Dulimi and Montana Management Inc. v Switzerland: To what extent does the application of UNSC Resolution 1483 impact the protection of individuals’ human rights in the pursuit of global security?

Leave a Comment / Alberta Davanzo di Cozur, Public Law / LSE Law Review

Abstract This essay offers a fresh perspective on the interplay between international security measures and individual human rights by critically analysing the application of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1483 through the lens of the Al-Dulimi case. Many scholars have commented on this landmark case, drawing on parallels with the Kadi case. However, this note

Al-Dulimi and Montana Management Inc. v Switzerland: To what extent does the application of UNSC Resolution 1483 impact the protection of individuals’ human rights in the pursuit of global security? Read More »

Revisiting the International Court of Justice’s Treatment of Non-Geographical Factors in Maritime Delimitation Cases: Somalia v Kenya as a Magnifying Glass

Leave a Comment / Gillian Choy, International Law / LSE Law Review

Introduction In contentious maritime disputes, the International Court of Justice uses a ‘three-stage’ approach to delineate maritime boundaries. This comprises (a) the drawing of a provisional equidistance line; (b) a consideration of ‘relevant circumstances’ which call for the adjustment of this line to achieve an equitable result; and (c) the establishment of a disproportionality test

Revisiting the International Court of Justice’s Treatment of Non-Geographical Factors in Maritime Delimitation Cases: Somalia v Kenya as a Magnifying Glass Read More »

Reassessing Nottebohm in an Era of Global Mobility

1 Comment / International Law, Jan Młynarczyk / LSE Law Review

Abstract Despite heavy criticism, the ‘genuine link test’ for assessing the bindingness of a conferral of citizenship on third States, devised by the International Court of Justice in the 1955 case of Nottebohm, still influences the approaches to naturalisation worldwide. This article analyses the implications of the judgment in the age of unprecedented global mobility.

Reassessing Nottebohm in an Era of Global Mobility Read More »

A Comparative Analysis of Milieudefensie through the Lens of the Common Law: Could Companies be Negligent Under English Tort for Producing Climate Change-Causing Emissions?

1 Comment / Clarissa Wong, Private Law / LSE Law Review

In May 2021, the Dutch court of first instance in Milieudefensie v Royal Dutch Shell established a new private law obligation for a key carbon emitter: it must, through corporate policy, remove or prevent the serious risks of climate change.[1] In accordance with this obligation, Royal Dutch Shell – now renamed ‘Shell’ – was issued

A Comparative Analysis of Milieudefensie through the Lens of the Common Law: Could Companies be Negligent Under English Tort for Producing Climate Change-Causing Emissions? Read More »