Law of International Organisations

I will provide students with a Reader containing relevant documents. The links are to be found below:|| <b>UNIT 1:</b>|| Article 2 (a) of the International Law Commission’s Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations, and commentary (Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 2011, Vol. II (2), 73-78: <a>http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/reports/2011/english/chp5.pdf</a>|| <b>UNIT 2</b>:|| International Court of Justice, <i>Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United Nations</i>, Advisory Opinion, <i>I.C.J. Reports 1949</i> 174, 176-180|| <a>http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/4/1835.pdf</a>|| United Nations General Assembly resolution 67/19 of 29 November 2012 (Palestine)|| <b> </b>|| <a>http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/67/19</a>|| United Nations General Assembly resolution 65/276 of 3 May 2011 (Participation of the EU)|| <a>http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/65/276</a>|| <b>UNIT 3:</b>|| International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Appeals Chamber, <i>Prosecutor v. Dusko Tadic</i>,<i> Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction</i>, 2 October 1995, paras. 26-48|| <a>http://www.icty.org/x/cases/tadic/acdec/en/51002.htm</a>|||| Court of Justice of the European Communities (Grand Chamber),|| <i>Yassin Abdullah Kadi and Al Barakaat International Foundation / Council of the European Union and Commission of the European Communities, Joint Cases C-402/05 P et C 415/05 P, </i>Judgment, 3 September 2008, paras. 11-45 and 280-328|| <a>http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf;jsessionid=9ea7d2dc30db0fa489e15721438fa4cca75bcc03f256.e34KaxiLc3qMb40Rch0SaxuKch50?text=&amp;docid=67611&amp;pageIndex=0&amp;doclang=en&amp;mode=lst&amp;dir=&amp;occ=first&amp;part=1&amp;cid=1427847</a>|| <strong>UNIT 4:</strong>|| Statute of the I.C.J.|| Internal Practice|| <b>UNIT 5:</b>|| International Court of Justice, <i>Difference Relating to Immunity from Legal Process of a Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights</i>, Advisory Opinion, <i>1.C.J. Reports 1999</i> 62, 81-89 (paras. 38-67): <a>http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/100/7619.pdf</a>|| European Court of Human Rights, <i>Waite and Kennedy v. Germany</i>, Judgment, 18 February 1999 <a>http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/fra/pages/search.aspx?i=001-58912</a>|| <b>UNIT 6:</b>|| Charter of the United Nations and Statute of the International Court of Justice: <a>https://treaties.un.org/doc/publication/ctc/uncharter.pdf</a>|| Dutch experience with the <i>European Patent Office</i> (EPO) [https://www.suepo.org/public/su15088cpe.pdf] and|| <i>Mothers of Srebrenica</i>:|| [http://www.asser.nl/upload/documents/20120905T111510-Supreme%20Court%20Decision%20English%2013%20April%202012.pdf]|| <b>UNIT 7:</b>|| Articles of the International Law Commission’s Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations, and commentary Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 2011, Vol. II (2):|| <a>http://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/commentaries/9_11_2011.pdf</a>|| European Court of Human Rights, Grand Chamber, <i>Behrami and Behrami v. France</i>|| <i>(Application No. 71412/01) and Saramati v. France, Germany and Norway (Application No.78166/01), </i>Decision as to the Admissibility, 2 May 2007, paras. 1-17 and 121-153|| <a>http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/fra/pages/search.aspx?i=001-80830</a>||