Monthly archive October, 2019

Jurisdictional reasonableness under customary international law: The approach of the Restatement (Fourth) of US Foreign Relations Law

1. Introduction In 1987, the American Law Institute published the Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law.[1] Sections 402-404 of the Restatement (Third) covered the customary international law governing jurisdiction to prescribe, and Section 403 set forth a requirement of jurisdictional reasonableness that called for weighing a number of factors in each case. Section 403 built...

Reflections on ‘Reasonableness’ in the Restatement (Fourth) of US Foreign Relations Law

1. Introduction In public international law, ‘jurisdiction’ may be defined as ‘the exercise of sovereign power or authority’.[1] As famously described in the Island of Palmas case, ‘sovereignty in the relations between States signifies independence’.[2] Yet, as noted by Oxman, while the ‘power to take action derives from sovereign independence’, its ‘scope and exercise’ is...

Reasonableness in its reasoning: How the European Union can mitigate problematic extraterritoriality on a de-territorialised internet

1. Introduction There is an extraterritorial character to European Union (EU) data protection law that can be both necessary and problematic.[1] EU lawmakers are enacting regulation that directly or indirectly compels non-EU (third State) actors to behave in a particular way to comply with EU law. In contrast to many of these third countries, numerous...

Jurisdictional Reasonableness

Introduced by Cedric Ryngaert and Michail Vagias In a globalized world, phenomena such as transnational crime, Internet transactions and climate change are not limited to just one state. Instead, they have connections with multiple states, each of which may want to exercise its jurisdiction over them, often on the basis of a version of the...