International Law in Brief


International Law in Brief (ILIB) is a forum that provides updates on current developments in international law from the editors of ASIL's International Legal Materials.
| By: Catherina Valenzuela-Bock : November 20, 2015 |

On November 10, 2015, the European Court of Human Rights (Court) ruled in Couderc and Hachette Filipacchi Associés v. France that a court decision against weekly newspaper Paris Match for publishing information about Prince Albert of Monaco’s private life violated Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention on Human Rights. According to the press release, the case concerned a newspaper article written about a woman known as Ms. Coste, who claimed that Prince Albert is the father of her son, and included a picture of the prince with the child. Having...


| By: Catherina Valenzuela-Bock : November 13, 2015 |

On November 3, 2015, a tribunal constituted under the ICSID Convention dismissed all claims brought by a U.S. investor against the Sultanate of Oman. Mr. Al Tamimi, a U.S. citizen, had initiated the arbitration proceedings for alleged breach of provisions of the U.S.-Oman Free Trade Agreement (Agreement) regarding national treatment, expropriation, and minimum standard of treatment. Mr. Al Tamimi had invested in the development and operation of a limestone quarry, entering into contracts with the state-owned Oman Mining Company LLC (OMCO) for the lease of the site. According to the lease...


| By: Catherina Valenzuela-Bock : November 13, 2015 |

On November 10, 2015, the European Court of Human rights ruled in M’Bala M’Bala v. France (judgment only available in French) that Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention on Human Rights (Convention) does not protect negationist and anti-Semitic performances. According to the press release, Mr. M’Bala M’Bala put on a performance which included the participation of a man convicted for his “negationist and revisionist opinions, mainly his denial of the existence of gas chambers in concentration camps,” wearing a costume “reminiscent of the clothing worn by...


| By: Catherina Valenzuela-Bock : November 13, 2015 |

On November 1, 2015, the Agreement on Compensation for Certain Victims of Holocaust-Related Deportation from France Who are not Covered by French Programs (Agreement) between the U.S. and France entered into force. According to the press release, the Agreement was signed in December 2014, and “will supplement the programs established by France for reparation and compensation of the victims of anti-Semitic persecutions during the Holocaust.” The fund will be administered by the U.S., who will distribute the $60 million provided by France to eligible Americans, Israelis, and other victims...


| By: Catherina Valenzuela-Bock : November 06, 2015 |

On October 29, 2015, the European Parliament voted to approve a resolution calling on member states to “drop any criminal charges against Edward Snowden, grant him protection and consequently prevent extradition or rendition by third parties, in recognition of his status as whistle-blower and international human rights defender.” According to the press release, the Parliament also welcomed the European Court of Justice’s decision in Schrems v. Data Protection Commissioner, calling on the Commission to recognize the “impact of the judgment” and to “take the necessary measures to...


| By: Catherina Valenzuela-Bock : November 06, 2015 |

On October 29, 2015, a tribunal constituted under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Convention) decided that it has jurisdiction to hear the dispute between the Philippines and China regarding some areas of the South China Sea. The Philippines initiated the proceedings, asking the tribunal to rule on China’s “historical rights” claims to the area; the status of several maritime features; as well as the compatibility of Chinese activities, such as construction and fishing, with the Convention. China has contended that the tribunal lacks jurisdiction and has refused to...


| By: Catherina Valenzuela-Bock : November 06, 2015 |

On October 23, 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (Court) upheld a lower court’s dismissal of a suit brought by a U.S. citizen against the FBI for alleged torture incidents in Africa. Mr. Meshal had sued under the Bivens doctrine, which allows a private action for damages against the federal officers alleged to have violated the citizen’s constitutional rights. His complaint alleged that he had been arrested and detained in secret, without access to counsel, moved around several African countries, and had been threatened with torture and death. The Court...


| By: Catherina Valenzuela-Bock : October 30, 2015 |

On October 26, 2015, Italy’s highest administrative court (Court) ruled (judgment only available in Italian) that same-sex marriages entered into abroad cannot be registered in Italy. According to a news report, the case invalidates a lower court’s ruling finding in favor of various Italian cities that had been registering same sex marriages conducted abroad and granting the couples the same rights as heterosexual couples marrying outside Italy. The Court annulled that decision, noting that there was no legal framework for same-sex unions. Italy’s Interior Minister stated, “Let us be clear...


| By: Catherina Valenzuela-Bock : October 30, 2015 |

On October 27, 2015, the European Court of Human Rights (Court) ruled in R.E. v. United Kingdom that the covert surveillance of legal consultations between detainees and their lawyers violated Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence) of the European Convention on Human Rights (Convention). According to the press release, in the course of his detention in May 2010, authorities failed to provide R.E.’s attorneys assurances that their consultations would be confidential. R.E. brought suit alleging the domestic regime governing surveillance of...


| By: Catherina Valenzuela-Bock : October 30, 2015 |

On October 22, 2015, the Court of Justice of the European Union (Court) ruled that the exchange of traditional currencies for units of the “bitcoin” virtual currency is exempt from value added tax (VAT). The Court held that this type of transaction did not fall under the VAT directive, because “virtual currency has no purpose other than to be a means of payment” and thus “cannot be characterised as ‘tangible property’ within the meaning of Article 14 of the VAT Directive.” It also clarified that “the exchange of traditional currency for units of the ‘bitcoin’ virtual currency and vice...