Filippo Fontanelli – författare

The judgment of the European Court of Justice concerning the Kadi case has raised substantive and procedural issues that have caught the attention of scholars from many disciplines including EU law, constitutional law, international law and jurisprudence. This book offers a comprehensive view of the Kadi case, and explores specific issues that are anticipated to resonate beyond the immediate case from which they derive.The first part of the volume sets out an analysis of the new judgment of the Court, favouring a "contextual" reading of what is the latest link in a judicial chain. The following three parts offer interdisciplinary accounts of the decision of the European Court of Justice, including legal theory, constitutional law, and international law. The book closes with an epilogue by Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann, who studies the role of the Kadi case in the methodology of international law and its contribution to the concept of global justice.The book brings together legal scholars from a range of fields, and discusses pressing topics such as the European Union’s objective of ‘the strict observance and the development of international law’, the EU as a site of global governance, constitutional pluralism and the protections of fundamental rights.

The judgment of the European Court of Justice concerning the Kadi case has raised substantive and procedural issues that have caught the attention of scholars from many disciplines including EU law, constitutional law, international law and jurisprudence. This book offers a comprehensive view of the Kadi case, and explores specific issues that are anticipated to resonate beyond the immediate case from which they derive.The first part of the volume sets out an analysis of the new judgment of the Court, favouring a "contextual" reading of what is the latest link in a judicial chain. The following three parts offer interdisciplinary accounts of the decision of the European Court of Justice, including legal theory, constitutional law, and international law. The book closes with an epilogue by Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann, who studies the role of the Kadi case in the methodology of international law and its contribution to the concept of global justice.The book brings together legal scholars from a range of fields, and discusses pressing topics such as the European Union’s objective of ‘the strict observance and the development of international law’, the EU as a site of global governance, constitutional pluralism and the protections of fundamental rights.

Both in Europe and around the world, 2017 has been another difficult year for the protection of human rights. Examples of the increased pressure on the European human rights system are apparent: the attack on the independence of the judiciary in Poland, which was responded to by the first time initiation of the rule of law procedure by the European Commission; the increasing human rights issues arising from European migration policy; Russia's suspension of its financial contribution to the Council of Europe and Turkey's lowering of its contribution; and the difficulties in appointing key human rights positions in the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.Split into its customary four parts and complemented by book reviews of recent publications on human rights in Europe, the tenth volume of the European Yearbook on Human Rights brings together renowned scholars to analyse some of the most pressing and topical human rights issues being faced in Europe today.

In Jurisdiction and Admissibility in Investment Arbitration, Filippo Fontanelli offers an analysis of the subject for practitioners and scholars. The author undertakes two converging studies: first, the practice of investment tribunals is surveyed to provide a representative overview of how jurisdiction and admissibility operate in arbitration proceedings. Second, these concepts are studied in the wider framework of public international law litigation, in the attempt to solve the definitional issues, or at least trace them back to their theoretical background.The analysis shows that the confusion prevailing in investment arbitration is largely a legacy of the comparable confusion that affects the notions of jurisdiction and admissibility in all kinds of dispute settlement under international law. Whilst the confusion is often irrelevant in the practice, some instances arise where it affects the outcome of the proceedings. The essay discusses some of these instances and recommends adopting a novel approach, which hinges on judicial discretion as the critical element of admissibility.