Cambridge Catalogue  
  • Help
Home > Catalogue > The Role of Customary Law in Sustainable Development
The Role of Customary Law in Sustainable Development
Google Book Search

Search this book

Details

  • Page extent: 524 pages
  • Size: 228 x 152 mm
  • Weight: 0.94 kg

Library of Congress

  • Dewey number: 346.044
  • Dewey version: 22
  • LC Classification: n/a
  • LC Subject headings:
    • Sustainable development--Law and legislation
    • Customary law

Library of Congress Record

Hardback

 (ISBN-13: 9780521859257 | ISBN-10: 0521859255)




THE ROLE OF CUSTOMARY LAW IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT




For many nations, a key challenge is how to achieve sustainable development without a return to centralized planning. Using case studies from Greenland, Hawaii and Northern Norway, this book examines whether ‘bottom-up’ systems such as customary law can play a critical role in achieving viable systems for managing natural resources. Customary law consists of underlying social norms that may become the acknowledged law of the land. The key to determining whether a custom constitutes customary law is whether the public acts as if the observance of the custom is legally obligated. While the use of customary law does not always produce sustainability, the study of customary methods of resource management can produce valuable insights into methods of managing resources in a sustainable way.

PETER ØREBECH is a Research Scholar at the European Law Research Center, Harvard Law School.

FRED BOSSELMAN is Professor of Law Emeritus at the Chicago-Kent College of Law.

JES BJARUP is Professor of Law Emeritus at the University of Stockholm.

DAVID CALLIES is Benjamin A. Kudo Professor of Law at the University of Hawai’i at Manoa.

MARTIN CHANOCK is Professor of Law at La Trobe University, Melbourne.

HANNE PETERSEN is Professor of Greenlandic Sociology of Law at the University of Copenhagen.







THE ROLE OF CUSTOMARY LAW IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT




PETER ØREBECH, FRED BOSSELMAN, JES BJARUP, DAVID CALLIES, MARTIN CHANOCK AND HANNE PETERSEN







CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS
Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo

Cambridge University Press
The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 2RU, UK

Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York

www.cambridge.org
Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521859257

© Peter Ørebech, Fred Bosselman, Jes Bjarup, David Callies, Martin Chanock and Hanne Petersen 2005

This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception
and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements,
no reproduction of any part may take place without
the written permission of Cambridge University Press.

First published 2005

Printed in the United Kingdom at the University Press, Cambridge

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN-13 978-0-521-85925-7 hardback
ISBN-10 0-521-85925-5 hardback




Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this book, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.







To Vincent Ostrom







CONTENTS




  Preface page ix
  Acknowledgements x
  Table of cases xi
  List of international conventions xviii
 
  Introduction 1
1   The linkage between sustainable development and customary law 12
2   Three case studies from Hawaii, Norway and Greenland 43
3   Social interaction: the foundation of customary law 89
4   How custom becomes law in England 158
5   How custom becomes law in Norway 224
6   Adaptive resource management through customary law 245
7   The place of customary law in democratic societies 282
8   Customary law, sustainable development and the failing state 338
9   Towards sustainability: the basis in international law 384
10   The case studies revisited 411
11   The choice of customary law 435
12   Conclusion: customary law in a globalizing culture 445
 
  References 451
  Index 489
  Authors index 500






PREFACE




Duncan A. French, in his book on the role of the state and sustainable development (2002), wrote: “For many developed States a key challenge is how to achieve sustainable development without a return to centralized planning, an anathema to most States with developed market economies.” In this volume we propose that “bottom-up systems” like customary law play a role in the achievement of viable social systems.

   This book is a compilation of contributions that was first debated during the Working Group meeting at Rockefeller Foundation Study and Conference Center in Bellagio (1999) on “The role of customary Law in a local self-governing sustainable development model.” The group met in 2000 at Richardson School of Law, Honolulu and in 2002 at University of TromsØ, Norway for discussions on the prospects of customary law establishing sustainable societies.

   Most of the chapters are the sole responsibility of one or two contributors. Jes Bjarup undertook the studies presented in Chapter 3; Fred Bosselman has written Chapters 1, 6, 11, and Section 10.1 as well as the introduction and the conclusion. David Callies is the author of Section 2.1 and Chapter 4; Martin Chanock the author of Chapter 8 and Section 9.8; Hanne Petersen of Sections 2.3 and 10.3; and Peter Ørebech of Chapters 1, 5, 7 and Sections 2.2, 9.1–9.7, 9.9, 10.2, and the introduction and conclusion.

   Despite the many authors and their sole responsibility for their contributions, the chapters are in many ways linked together. Hopefully the reader will find at least one “red thread”!







ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS




Collaborators have contributed greatly to this project: first of all, Vincent Ostrom, who planted the seeds of self governing entities’ production of normative structure as viable structures of resources management. He recommended that the Rockefeller Foundation provide research facilities at the Study and Conference Center in Bellagio (1999). Alan Berolzheimer and Juli Campagna provided very helpful editing assistance, and Jayne Hoffman and Juli Campagna helped out with the registries. The Chicago Kent College of Law’s Cassandra Mehlum and Vince Rivera worked out textual discrepancies and shaped up the manuscript design.

   Our gratitude goes to Rockefeller Foundation for support and offering great localities at Bellagio and The Norwegian Research Council for travels funding. Thanks also to the Norwegian College of Fisheries Science and University of TromsØ for sponsoring the 2002 event and to Chicago Kent College of Law for excellent working conditions. David Callies thanks his research assistant Emily Henderson, then a Ph.D. candidate, for her tireless research in the stacks of the Squire Law Library; Dr. Malcolm Grant, CBE, President and Provost of University College London but then Head of Department, Land Economy, for encouragement, advice and office space; David Wills, Director, and Peter Zawada, Deputy Director, of the Squire Law Library for faculty privileges and research space; Professor John Baker, Fellow of St. Catharine’s College for counsel and advice, and Clare Hall for meals, accommodation and fellowship, all during the two terms spent at Cambridge University in 1999 as a Visiting Fellow, preparing my contribution on customary law, and to Peter Ørebech for organizing the seminar at Villa Serbolini in Bellagio in early 1999 where our project commenced. Thank you all!

   Peter Ørebech & Fred Bosselman







TABLE OF CASES




A

Abercromby v. Fermoy Town Comm’r, 1 I.R. 302 (1900). Ch. 4

Abbot v. Weekly, 83 Eng. Rep. 357 (1665). Ch. 4

Albright v. Cortright, 45 A. 634, 635 (1900). Ch. 4

Anglo-Hellenic Steamship Co. v. Louis Dreyfus & Co., 108 L.T.R. 36 (1903). Ch. 4

Arnold v. Mundy, 6 N.J.L. 1, 22–26 (1821). Ch. 2

Arthur v. Bockenham, 11 Mod. 148, 160–161, 6 Ann. Ch. 4.

In re Ashford, 440 P.2d 76 (1968). Ch. 10

Request for Interpretation of Judgment of 20 Nov. 1950 in the Asylum Case (Colombia v. Peru), 1950 I.C.J. 266 (Nov. 27). Ch. 9.

B

Badger v. Ford, 106 Eng. Rep. 618 (1819). Ch. 4

Rt. 1995 s. 644 (Balsfjord Pasture Case). Ch. 5 &10

Barbra v. Okuna, No. 8160 (1982) (mem.). Ch. 2

Case Concerning the Barcelona Traction Light and Power Co., Ltd. (Belg. v. Spain), 1970 I.C.J. 23 (Feb. 5). Ch. 9

Barker v. Cocker, 80 Eng. Rep. 471 (1620). Ch. 4

Bastard v. Smith, [1835–42] All E.R. 201 (C.P. 1837). Ch. 4

Batten v. Gedye, 41 Ch. D. 507 (1889). Ch. 4

Alfred F. Beckett Ltd. v. Lyons, 1 Ch. 449 (1967). Ch. 4

Bell v. Wardell, 125 Eng. Rep. 1131 (1740). Ch. 4

Rt. 1993 s. 272 (Berghorn Case). Ch. 7.

Blackett v. Bradley & Others, 121 Eng. Rep. 963 (1862). Ch. 4

S. Bluefin Tuna Cases (N.Z. v. Japan; Austl. v. Japan), 1999 ITLOS para. 80 (Aug. 27). Ch. 9

Bluwett v. Tregonning, 111 Eng. Rep. 524 (1835). Ch. 4

Rt. 1912 s. 433 (Bolstadfjord Case). Ch. 5

In the matter of the Boundaries of Pulehunui, 4 Haw. 239 (1879). Ch. 2 & 10.

Bount v. Layard, Ch. 4.

Bourke v. Davis, 44 Ch. D. 110 (1889). Ch. 4

Marquis of Breadalbane v. McGregor, (1848) VII Bell 43. Ch. 4

Broadbent v. Wilkes, 125 Eng. Rep. 1214 (1742). Ch. 4

Brocklebank v. Thompson, 2 Ch. D. 344 (1903). Ch. 4

Bryant v. Foot, L.R.-3 Q.B. 497 (1868). Ch. 4

Byrd v. Wilford, 78 Eng. Rep. 717 (1596). Ch. 4

C

Chafin v. Betsworth, 83 Eng. Rep. 644 (1618). Ch. 4

Champneys v. Buchan, 62 Eng. Rep. 41 (1857). Ch. 4

The King v. Nicholas of Chanceux, 97 Selden Soc. 61 (1329). Ch. 4

Chassagnou & Others v. France, 7 BHRC 151 (1999). Ch. 4

Lord Chesterfield v. Harris, 2 Ch. 397 (1908). Ch. 4

Cole v. Hawkins, (1713) 10 Mod. 251. Ch. 4

Rt. 1985 s. 247 (Common Fisheries in Kaafjord). Ch. 2 (n. 129)

RG 1962 s. 262 (Common Grazing Case). Ch. 5

Concord Mfg. Co. v. Robertson, 25 A. 718, 721 (1889). Ch. 4

Continental Shelf (Tunis v. Libya), 1982 I.C.J. (Feb. 24). Ch. 7

Coote v. Ford 83 L.T.R. 482 (1900). Ch. 4

Corbin-Dykes Elec. Co. v. Burr, 500 P.2d 632, 634 (1972). Ch. 1

Coriton & Harvey v. Lithby, 86 Eng. Rep. 114 (1670). Ch. 4

Cort v. Birbeck, 99 Eng. Rep. 143 (1779). Ch. 4

State v. Cozzens, 2 R.I. 561 (1850). Ch. 4

D

Davis v. Trehane, 6 App. Cas. 460 (1881). Ch. 4

Day v. Savadge, 80 Eng. Rep. 235 (1614). Ch. 4

City of Daytona Beach v. Tona-Rama, Inc., 294 So.2d 73, 78 (1974). Ch. 4

Denn v. Sprey, 99 Eng. Rep. 1201 (1786). Ch. 4

Derry v. Sanders, 1 K.B. 223 (1919). Ch. 4

Devered v. Ratcliffe, 78 Eng. Rep. 442 (1590). Ch. 4

Devonald v. Rosser, 2 K.B. 728 (C.A. 1906). Ch. 4.

Drake v. Wigglesworth, 125 Eng. Rep. 1369 (1752). Ch. 4

Dyce v. Hay, 2 Ch. 538, 581 (1905). Ch. 4

Dyce v. Lady James Jay, (1852) 1 Macqueen 305; 19 Digest (Repl.) 15. Ch. 4

E

Eagle Cliff Fishing Co. v. McGowan, 137 P. 766, 770 (1914). Ch. 4

Eastlake v. Forest City Enter., Inc., 426 U.S. 668, 678–79 (1976). Ch. 7

R. v. Inhabitants of Ecclesfield, 106 Eng. Rep. 128 (1818). Ch. 4

Edwards v. Jenkins, 1 Ch. 308 (1896). Ch. 4

Elwood v. Bullock, 6 Q.B. 383 (1844). Ch. 4

F

Fisher v. Lane, 95 Eng. Rep. 1065. Ch. 4

Fitch v. Fitch, 2 Esp. 543 (1797). Ch. 4

Fitch v. Rawling, 126 Eng. Rep. 614 (C.P. 1795). Ch. 1 & 4.

Lord Fitzhardinge v. Purcell, 2 Ch. 139 (1908). Ch. 4

Rt. 1959 s. 1321 (Fluberg Pasture Case). Ch. 5 & 10.

Fookes v. Beer. Ch. 1 (n. 45)

Fowley Marine Ltd. v. Gafford, 2 All E.R. 472 (1967). Ch. 4

Rt. 1931 s. 428 (Frosta Felling Rights Case). Ch. 5

Fryer v. Johnson, 95 Eng. Rep. 667 (1755). Ch. 4

G

Case Concerning the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hung. v Slovk.), 1997 I.C.J. 7, 31 (Sept. 25). Ch. 4

Gard v. Callard, 105 Eng. Rep. 1169 (1817). Ch. 4

Gatewards Case, 77 Eng. Rep. 344 (1607). Ch. 4

Gavi v. Martyn, (1865) 19 C.B. (N.S.) 732. Ch. 4

George v. Jew. Ch. 4

Gibson v. Crick, 158 Eng. Rep. 835 (1862). Ch. 4

Gifford v. Lord Yarborough, 130 Eng. Rep. 1028 (1828). Ch. 4

Goodday v. Michell, Eliz. 441 (1595). Ch. 4

Gough v. Bell, 22 N.J. 156, 160 (1847). Ch. 4

Gough v. Bell, 22 N.J. 441 (1850). Ch. 4

Graham v. Walker, 61 A. 98 (1905). Ch. 4 & 10.

Grant v. Kearney, (1823) 12 Price 773. Ch. 4 (n. 247)

H

Haiku Plantations Ass’n v. Lono, 618 P.2d 312 (1980). Ch. 2

Hall v. Nottingham, 1 Ex. D. 1 (1875). Ch. 4

Hammerton v. Honey, 24 W.R. 603 (1876). Ch. 4

Hamstede v. Abbot of Abington, (1319) 70 Selden Soc. 11, 13. Ch. 2

State of Hawai’i v. Hanapi, 970 P.2d 485 (1998). Ch. 2 & 10.

Harbin & Uxor v. Green, 80 Eng. Rep. 336 (1616). Ch. 4

State ex rel. Harman v. Fox, 594 P.2d 1093, 1101 (1979). Ch. 4

Henry v. Ahlo, 9 Haw. 490 (1894). Ch. 2

Rt. 1963 s. 370 (Herring Fishery Case). Ch. 5 & 10.

Hill v. Hanks, 80 Eng. Rep. 1066 (1614). Ch. 4

Hilton v. Earl of Granville, 5 Q.B. 701 (1844). Ch. 4

Hix v. Gardner, 80 Eng. Rep. 1062 (1614). Ch. 4

I

Idaho v. U.S.D.O.I., 880 F.2d 432, 477 (1989). Ch. 7

J

Jackman v. Hoddeston, 78 Eng. Rep. 599 (1594). Ch. 4

James v. U.K. (1986) ECHR 8793/79. Ch. 9

Japan – Measures Affecting the Importation of Apples, AB-2003-4, WT/DS245/AB/R, P. 309. Ch. 9

Jarndyce v. Jarndyce, CHARLES DICKENS, BLEAK HOUSE 481–498 (Bantom 1992) (1868). Ch. 4 (n. 247)

RG 1962 s. 265 (Jessheim Common Grazing Case). Ch. 5 & 10

Case no 145/1998, Valdimar Johannesson v. Islenska Rikinu. Ch. 7 (n. 167)

Johnson v. Clark, 1 Ch. 303 (1908). Ch. 4

The King v. Joliffe. Ch. 4 (n. 207)

Rt. 1935 s. 838 (Jølster Lake Case). Ch. 5

K

Ka Pa’Akai O Ka’Aina v. Land Use Comm’n, 7 P.3d 1068 (2000). Ch. 2

Kaiser Aetna v. U.S., 444 U.S. 164 (1979) (6–3 decision) (Blackmun, J. dissenting). Ch. 4

Kalaukoa v. Keawe, 9 Haw. 191 (1893). Ch. 2

Kalipi v. Hawaiian Trust Co., 656 P.2d 745 (1982). Ch. 2

L

Rt. 1963 s. 370 (Lågen Case). Ch. 5.

Legh v. Hewitt, 102 Eng. Rep. 789 (1803). Ch. 4

Lewis v. Masters, 87 Eng. Rep. 528 (1695). Ch. 4

Lilleport Court Leet, Selden Soc. Vol. 4, 1890. Ch. 4

Linn-Regis Corp. v. Taylor, 83 Eng. Rep. 629 (1684). Ch. 4

Lockwood v. Wood, 6 Q.B. 67 (Ex. 1844). Ch. 4

R. v. City of London, (1321) 85 Selden Soc. 35. Ch. 4

London Corp. v. Cox, L.R. 2-H.L. 239 (1867). Ch. 4

Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp., 458 U.S. 419 (1982) (6-3 decision) (Blackmun, J. dssenting). Ch. 4

The Case of the S.S. “Lotus,” 1927 P.C.I.J. Ser. A, No. 10 (Sept. 7). Ch. 9

Louisville & N.R. Co. v. Reverman, 49 S.W. 558, 560 (1932). Ch. 1 (n. 47)

M

Mabo v. Queensl., 175 C.L.R. 1 (1992). Ch. 10

McCready v. Va., 94 U.S. 391 (1876). Ch. 2 (n. 132)

Mercer v. Denne, 2 Ch. 538 (C.A. 1905). Ch. 4

Miles v. Benet, (1401) Y.B. 2 Hen. 4, fol. 24, Trin., pl. 20 (1401). Ch. 4

Millar v. Taylor, 98 Eng. Rep. 201 (1769). Ch. 4

Millechamp v. Johnson, Willes n. 205 (1746). Ch. 4

Morton v. Mancari, 417 U.S. 535 (1974). Ch. 10

Mounsey v. Ismay, 1 H&C 728 (1863). Ch. 4

N

Needler v. Bishop of Winchester, 80 Eng. Rep. 367 (1614). Ch. 4

New Windsor Corp. v. Mellor, 3 W.L.R. 25 (C.A. 1975). Ch. 4

Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. U.S.), 1986 I.C.J. 135 (June 27). Ch. 9

Duke of Norfolk v. Meyers, 56 Eng. Rep. 639 (1819). Ch. 4

North Sea Continental Shelf Cases (F.R.G. v. Den., F.R.G. v. Neth.), 1969 I.C.J. 3 (Feb. 20). Ch. 9

Request for an Examination of the Situation in Accordance with Paragraph 63 of the Court’s Judgment of 20 December 1974 in the Nuclear Tests (N.Z. v. France) Case, 1995 I.C.J. 583, 592 (Sept. 22). Ch. 9

Legality of the Threat of Use of Nuclear Weapons, 1996 I.C.J. 226, 279–80 (July 8). Ch. 7

O

Rt. 1854 s. 412 (Occupation of Timber). Ch. 10

Oni v. Meek, 2 Haw. 87 (1858). Ch. 2

The King v. Oswestry. Ch. 4 (n. 207)

P

Pain v. Patrick, 87 Eng. Rep. 191 (1690). Ch. 4

Palama v. Sheehan, 440 P.2d 95 (1968). Ch. 2 (n. 14)

Paramour v. Verall & Auters, 72 Eng. Rep. 786 (1599). Ch. 4

Parker v. Combleford, 78 Eng. Rep. 959 (1599). Ch. 4

Parton v. Mason, 73 Eng. Rep. 440 (1561). Ch. 4

Payne v. Ecclesiastical Comm’r & Landon, 30 T.L.R. 167 (1913). Ch. 4

Payne v. Providence Gas Co., 77 A. 2d 145 (1910). Ch. 4

Pele Def. Fund v. Paty, 837 P.2d 1247 (1992). Ch. 2

In re Porter, 890 P.2d 1377, 1386 (1995). Ch. 4

Pub. Access Shoreline Hawaii v. Hawaii County Planning Comm’n, 903 P.2d 1246 (1995). Ch. 2

R

Rice v. Cayetano, 528 U.S. 495 (2000) (7-2 decision) (Stevens, J. & Ginsburg, J. dissenting). Ch. 2 & 10

Richards v. Dovey, 125 Eng. Rep. 1352 (1746). Ch. 4

Case Concerning the Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Port. v India), 1960 I.C.J. 6 (Apr. 12). Ch. 9

Roe v. Parker, 5 Term. Rep. 26 (1792). Ch. 4

Rogers v. Brenton, 10 Q.B. 26 (1847). Ch. 4

Rogers v. Pedro, 642 P.2d 549 (1982). Ch. 2

Rollesley v. Toft, (1495) 102 Selden Soc. 31. Ch. 4

Rowles v. Mason, 123 Eng. Rep. 829, 892 (1611). Ch. 4

S

Salforde’s Case, 3 Dyer 357b (1577). Ch. 4

Scales v. Key, 113 Eng. Rep. 625 (1840). Ch. 4

Rt. 1896 s. 500 (Seaweed Sheds Case). Ch. 5

Selby v. Robinson, 2 Term. Rep. 758 (1788). Ch. 4

Simpson v. Bithwood, 83 Eng. Rep. 703 (1691). Ch. 4

Simpson v. Wells, 7 Q.B. 214 (1872). Ch. 4

Smith v. Archibald. Ch. 4 (n. 207)

Smith v. State of Md., 59 U.S. 71, 74–75 (1855). Ch. 2

Idaho v. Southern Refrigerated Transp., Inc., 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1869 (D. Idaho, 1991). Ch. 7

Sowerby v. Coleman, L.R.-2 Ex. 96 (1867). Ch. 4

Rt. 1972 s. 77 (Sperillen Case). Ch. 5

Steel v. Houghton, 126 Eng. Rep. 32 (1788). Ch. 4

Stevens v. City of Cannon Beach, 510 U.S. 1207 (1994) (7-2 decision) (Scalia, J. dissenting). Ch. 1

Swift v. Gifford, 23 F. Cas. 558 (D. Mass. 1872) (No. 13, 696). Ch. 1

T

Tanistry Case, 80 Eng. Rep. 639 (1608). Ch. 4

NJA 1981 p.357 (Taxed Mountain Case). Ch. 5

Taylor v. Devey & Graham. Ch. 4

Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill, 437 U.S. 153 (1978) (6-3 decision) (Powell, J. and Rehnquist, J. dissenting). Ch. 5 (nn. 37 & 38)

State ex rel. Thornton v. Hay, 462 P.2d 671 (1969). Ch. 4

Traherne v. Gardner, 119 Eng. Rep. 721 (1856). Ch. 4

Rt. 1888 s. 682 (Trondheimfjord Mussels Case). Ch. 5 & 10

Rt. 1918 II s. 261 (Trysil Firewood Case). Ch. 5

U

Case 68/86 U.K. v. Council, 1988 E.C.R. 855 para. 24. Ch. 7

V

R. v. Van Der Peet, 1996 (137) D.L.R. 289. Ch. 8

City of London v. Vanacre, 12 Mod. 270, 271 (1699). Ch. 4

Rt. 1983 s. 569 (Vansjö Lake Case). Ch. 5 & 10

Vinkestone v. Ebden, (1698) 1 Ld Raym 384. Ch. 2 (n. 34)

W

Wake v. Hall, 8 L.R.-A.C. 195 (1883). Ch. 4

Wakefield v. Duke of Buccleuch, L.R.-4 Eq. 613 (1866). Ch. 4

Walmesly v. Marshall, 56 Eng. Rep. 647 (1628). Ch. 4

Warrick v. Queens Coll., Oxford, 10 L.R. Eq. 105 (1870). Ch. 4

RG 1967 s. 351 (Waste Dumping Case). Ch. 7

Weekly v. Wildman, 91 Eng. Rep. 1169 (1698). Ch. 4

Wilkes v. Broadbent, 93 Eng. Rep. 1146 (1745). Ch. 4

Lady Wilson v. Willes, 7 East 121 (1806). Ch. 4

Wolstanton, Ltd. v. Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council, 3 All E.R. 101 (1940). Ch. 4

Wyld v. Silver, 3 W.L.R. 841 (1962). Ch. 4

Y

Commonwealth v. Yarmirr, HCA 56, 2001 AUST HIGHCT LEXIS 48. Ch. 10

Yarmirr v. N.T. Austl., 1998 AUST FEDCT LEXIS 500 (AUST FEDCT, 1998). Ch. 10

Yielding v. Fay, Cro. Eliz. 569 (1594). Ch. 4







LIST OF INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS




A

Agenda 21 Programme of Action for Sustainable Development

Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks (MHLC)

Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, Annex 1A to the Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (SPS Agreement)

B

Bamako Convention on the Ban of the Import into Africa and the control of Transboundary Movement and Management of Hazardous Wastes within Africa 1990

C

Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity

Convention Concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries (ILO No. 169)

Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping from Ships and Aircraft

Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention on Human Rights)

Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage

Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution on Further Reduction of Sulphur Emissions 1979, 1994 Protocol thereto

Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes (Helsinki Water Convention)

Copenhagen Declaration on Social Development

Convention on the Conservation and Management of Fisheries Resources in the South-East Atlantic Ocean 2000 (CC AMFR)

Convention on Conservation & Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stock in the Western & Central Pacific (MHCC)

D

Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Intentionally Wrongful Acts

G

General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT)

I

ILA New Delhi Declaration on Principles of International Law Relating to Sustainable Development

International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 1973

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966

J

Johannesburg Summit 2002

K

Kyoto Emission Control Provisions 1997 [Protocol to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change]

N

North Atlantic Fisheries Convention 1980 (NEAFC)

R

Rio Declaration on Environment and Development 1992

U

United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)

United Nations Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

United Nations General Assembly World Charter for Nature


printer iconPrinter friendly version AddThis