Abstract
The law of State immunity is at the intersection of international law and domestic politics. It is a salient case study of this relationship because of the competing claims to authority that are inherent to each dispute. This chapter uses two international decisions - the 2012 International Court of Justice judgment in Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy, Greece intervening) and the 2014 judgment of the Fourth Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in Jones and Ors v. United Kingdom - to analyse the concepts of escalation and interaction. The increased use of international courts by domestic actors in disputes over immunity is interesting but perhaps not surprising given the overall rise in the availability and use of third-party dispute settlement mechanisms. The greater puzzle lies in the varied reactions to international decisions, ranging from compliance to resistance, and the variables that condition such reactions. It seems that the existence of a conflicting constitutional norm may play an important role. The chapter concludes that Delmas-Marty’s concept of pluralism ordonné may be a way to conceptualise and develop procedural mechanisms of reciprocal restraint, respect and cooperation needed to adjust the competing claims of authority in this area.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | International Courts and Domestic Politics |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press |
| Pages | 206-226 |
| Number of pages | 21 |
| ISBN (Electronic) | 9781108590396 |
| ISBN (Print) | 9781108427760 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Jan 2018 |