International Law: Customary Form and Principles

Extract

[...] It depends on the cases and species. According to the 2014 report: « The particularly interested States are identified according to the considered rule and, in the rest, there are areas where one cannot specify the particularly interested States. Thus, there is a certain empiricism for this determination since everything depends on the species. Within the realm of quantum physics, there exists a principle of uncertainty: 'Heisenberg'. Thus, the fact that uncertainty is at the center of the discipline does not mean that it is inaccurate. [...]

[...] Judgment CE March 1966 - Ignazio Messina Company: What is interesting is the conclusions of the government commissioner who considers that it is necessary to transform the unwritten rule of international law into a general principle of domestic law so that this rule can be applicable in the French legal order: dualism is therefore put forward 20 years later, the EC renders a judgment of 18 April 1986 - Case Société des mines de potasse d'Alsace: The Commissioner of government renews the reasoning of 1966 and reasons in terms of dualism: necessity of transforming the DI rule into an internal norm. Why has the administrative judge long manifested this attachment to dualism? The causes of this attachment to dualism, while the judicial judge manifested an attachment to monism. Aspect The unwritten international law and particularly international custom present an uncertain character. There is a certain flou which characterizes international custom and the administrative judge did not accommodate this vagueness. Therefore, the administrative judge is not inclined to apply directly a norm having an uncertain character. [...]

[...] Thearticle 46 § « A violation is manifest if it is objectively evident to any State acting in good faith and in accordance with the established practice of customary international law. Thearticle 46 § 3 retains an equivalent rule within the 1986 CV. The article appears to be incomplete since we do not know what constitutes effective evidence, leaving room for subjectivity. The rule is therefore not satisfactory and always requires interpretation. - INTERNATIONAL JURISPRUDENCE: Consacres the authority of the intermediate solution and therefore what the Vienna Convention has consecrated. [...]

[...] It is the notion of the simplified agreement that is enshrined in the Constitution. Nevertheless, this reading is only an interpretation of the terms of Article 52, so we cannot certify without ambiguity that these agreements have a constitutional basis. Aspect The simplified agreements and French practice In French practice, the expression 'simplified agreement' is retained differently from the sense retained by the doctrine. It is necessary to refer here to the legislative guide that can be found on légifrance. [...]

[...] In fact, they both draw their formal validity from the constitution that enables the legislator to develop imperative and supplementary laws. On the other hand, imperative and supplementary laws are both laws that have a material validity dependent on the constitution: their content must respect the fundamental rules of the constitution. Thus, imperative and supplementary laws are on the same hierarchical level. The imperative law suffers no derogation by contract. In other words, the imperative law guarantees the OP and the contrary contract is tainted with invalidity. [...]