The theme throughout the book is argument that any jurisdictional assertion by states should be based on the "substantial connection test" to ensure that it is in keeping with the norm of the equality of states and the broader doctrine of comity between states. This is not a new test in the common law and certain aspects of international law but it has been used in a practical capacity to evaluate some jurisdictional claims and recognition of foreign judgments. It argues that the substantial connection test can be used not only as a measure of jurisdictional correctness but as a more holistic and less technical approach to the problem of extraterritorial jurisdiction. The problems that arise with the promotion of the questionable basis for jurisdiction like the 'effects doctrine' from the US and the passive personality principle which is also seen as a dubious basis for a jurisdictional claim can be resolved when states adhere to the substantial connection test. It will distinguish between legitimate and non legitimate claims or assertions of jurisdiction. This book evaluates the key aspects of extraterritorial jurisdiction and focuses on some of the more recent topics in this area that have had a profound effect on international law as a whole. Exerting the power of the state outside the territorial limits of the state is an increasing phenomenon in international law. It comments on the relationship between jurisdiction, sovereignty and international legal order.

Winner of the ASIL Book Awards Certificate of Merit 2020The emergence of feminist rewriting of key judgments has been one of the most interesting recent developments in legal methodology. This unique enterprise has seen scholars collaborate in the ''real world'' task of reassessing jurisprudence in light of feminist perspectives.This important new volume makes a significant contribution to the endeavour, exploring how key judgments in international law might have differed if feminist judges had sat on the bench.This collection asks whether feminist perspectives can offer meaningful and viable alternatives to international law norms; and if so, whether that application results in distinguishable differences in outcomes. It answers these questions with particular reference to sources of international law, the public and private divide, State responsibility, State immunities, treaty law, State sovereignty, human rights protection, global governance, and the concept of violence in international law. This landmark publication offers a truly innovative reassessment of international law.Winner of the 2020 ASIL Certificate of Merit for a Preeminent Contribution to Creative Scholarship.

Winner of the ASIL Book Awards Certificate of Merit 2020The emergence of feminist rewriting of key judgments has been one of the most interesting recent developments in legal methodology. This unique enterprise has seen scholars collaborate in the ''real world'' task of reassessing jurisprudence in light of feminist perspectives.This important new volume makes a significant contribution to the endeavour, exploring how key judgments in international law might have differed if feminist judges had sat on the bench.This collection asks whether feminist perspectives can offer meaningful and viable alternatives to international law norms; and if so, whether that application results in distinguishable differences in outcomes. It answers these questions with particular reference to sources of international law, the public and private divide, State responsibility, State immunities, treaty law, State sovereignty, human rights protection, global governance, and the concept of violence in international law. This landmark publication offers a truly innovative reassessment of international law.Winner of the 2020 ASIL Certificate of Merit for a Preeminent Contribution to Creative Scholarship.

Winner of the ASIL Book Awards Certificate of Merit 2020The emergence of feminist rewriting of key judgments has been one of the most interesting recent developments in legal methodology. This unique enterprise has seen scholars collaborate in the ‘real world’ task of reassessing jurisprudence in light of feminist perspectives.This important new volume makes a significant contribution to the endeavour, exploring how key judgments in international law might have differed if feminist judges had sat on the bench.This collection asks whether feminist perspectives can offer meaningful and viable alternatives to international law norms; and if so, whether that application results in distinguishable differences in outcomes. It answers these questions with particular reference to sources of international law, the public and private divide, State responsibility, State immunities, treaty law, State sovereignty, human rights protection, global governance, and the concept of violence in international law. This landmark publication offers a truly innovative reassessment of international law.Winner of the 2020 ASIL Certificate of Merit for a Preeminent Contribution to Creative Scholarship.

The theme throughout the book is argument that any jurisdictional assertion by states should be based on the "substantial connection test" to ensure that it is in keeping with the norm of the equality of states and the broader doctrine of comity between states. This is not a new test in the common law and certain aspects of international law but it has been used in a practical capacity to evaluate some jurisdictional claims and recognition of foreign judgments. It argues that the substantial connection test can be used not only as a measure of jurisdictional correctness but as a more holistic and less technical approach to the problem of extraterritorial jurisdiction. The problems that arise with the promotion of the questionable basis for jurisdiction like the 'effects doctrine' from the US and the passive personality principle which is also seen as a dubious basis for a jurisdictional claim can be resolved when states adhere to the substantial connection test. It will distinguish between legitimate and non legitimate claims or assertions of jurisdiction. This book evaluates the key aspects of extraterritorial jurisdiction and focuses on some of the more recent topics in this area that have had a profound effect on international law as a whole. Exerting the power of the state outside the territorial limits of the state is an increasing phenomenon in international law. It comments on the relationship between jurisdiction, sovereignty and international legal order.

Winner of the ASIL Book Awards Certificate of Merit 2020The emergence of feminist rewriting of key judgments has been one of the most interesting recent developments in legal methodology. This unique enterprise has seen scholars collaborate in the ''real world'' task of reassessing jurisprudence in light of feminist perspectives.This important new volume makes a significant contribution to the endeavour, exploring how key judgments in international law might have differed if feminist judges had sat on the bench.This collection asks whether feminist perspectives can offer meaningful and viable alternatives to international law norms; and if so, whether that application results in distinguishable differences in outcomes. It answers these questions with particular reference to sources of international law, the public and private divide, State responsibility, State immunities, treaty law, State sovereignty, human rights protection, global governance, and the concept of violence in international law. This landmark publication offers a truly innovative reassessment of international law.Winner of the 2020 ASIL Certificate of Merit for a Preeminent Contribution to Creative Scholarship.

Winner of the ASIL Book Awards Certificate of Merit 2020The emergence of feminist rewriting of key judgments has been one of the most interesting recent developments in legal methodology. This unique enterprise has seen scholars collaborate in the ''real world'' task of reassessing jurisprudence in light of feminist perspectives.This important new volume makes a significant contribution to the endeavour, exploring how key judgments in international law might have differed if feminist judges had sat on the bench.This collection asks whether feminist perspectives can offer meaningful and viable alternatives to international law norms; and if so, whether that application results in distinguishable differences in outcomes. It answers these questions with particular reference to sources of international law, the public and private divide, State responsibility, State immunities, treaty law, State sovereignty, human rights protection, global governance, and the concept of violence in international law. This landmark publication offers a truly innovative reassessment of international law.Winner of the 2020 ASIL Certificate of Merit for a Preeminent Contribution to Creative Scholarship.

Winner of the ASIL Book Awards Certificate of Merit 2020The emergence of feminist rewriting of key judgments has been one of the most interesting recent developments in legal methodology. This unique enterprise has seen scholars collaborate in the ‘real world’ task of reassessing jurisprudence in light of feminist perspectives.This important new volume makes a significant contribution to the endeavour, exploring how key judgments in international law might have differed if feminist judges had sat on the bench.This collection asks whether feminist perspectives can offer meaningful and viable alternatives to international law norms; and if so, whether that application results in distinguishable differences in outcomes. It answers these questions with particular reference to sources of international law, the public and private divide, State responsibility, State immunities, treaty law, State sovereignty, human rights protection, global governance, and the concept of violence in international law. This landmark publication offers a truly innovative reassessment of international law.Winner of the 2020 ASIL Certificate of Merit for a Preeminent Contribution to Creative Scholarship.