Originally it was suggested that I write about ‘rusty’ treaties – by which was meant ‘old’ treaties that have not been terminated – and their continued relevance in view of the principle of rebus sic stantibus, now enshrined in Article 62 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969. I did not relish that. There would be problems of definition: when can a treaty be said to be ‘old’? Also, I remain sceptical about the usefulness of the fundamental change principle, being of the view that it is of little real importance. Although invoked many times, so far no international tribunal has applied it. The editors therefore kindly agreed that I could instead write about treaties of a universal character, in that they are open to universal participation, but which are ‘limping’.

The editors of this Review have had the felicitous idea to mark its 50th anniversary with a special issue devoted to the time factor in international law, with one contribution devoted to the apparently declining importance of travaux préparatoires in the interpretation of treaties. Under Article 32 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, the preparatory works of a treaty are only to be consulted in a limited number of circumstances, and then only as supplementary means of interpretation: when application of the general rule (combining a textual approach with an interpretation in light of the treaty's object and purpose) does not lead to satisfactory results. Under Article 31, paragraph 2, of the Vienna Convention, travaux préparatoires do not even qualify as part of a treaty's context; clearly, the Vienna Convention envisages but a very limited role for a treaty's preparatory works. Yet, most international lawyers will almost automatically include a discussion of preparatory works in legal argument, and will consider it vital to do so: an argument without paying due regard to a treaty's drafting history is an incomplete argument. It is this ambivalence which I hope to explore.

The April 2003 occupation of Iraq by armed forces predominately of the United States and the United Kingdom was accompanied by the looting of archaeological sites and the Iraqi National Museum. Priceless artifacts dating back 7000 years disappeared. No effort was made by the occupying forces to protect the sites, although a few journalists and military personnel were later arrested when they attempted to smuggle looted objects into the United States. Given that international law has obliged an occupying power to protect cultural property at least since the adoption of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, a new Iraqi government could seek reparations if the occupying powers fail to take widespread and effective action to recover or replace lost objects and restore the museum and sites.

International law, both conventional and customary law, has been subject to rapid transformation and crystallization in the last few decades. This is especially the case in the field of international environmental law. Conduct that was not prohibited under international law at the time of initiation can now be characterized as contravening a number of newly and widely recognized principles and norms of international environmental law. Principles that may be said to have gained such wide recognition in international law as well as domestic law, albeit to varying degrees, include the precautionary principle, the polluter-pays principle and the sic utere tuo principle described below. Such principles have been invoked in a wide variety of international disputes with the aim of halting activities undertaken within one state having environmentally injurious transboundary consequences in other states or territories beyond the jurisdiction of any state (e.g., the High Seas).

The aim of this paper, in keeping with the theme of this jubilee issue, is to examine the private international law concept of public policy in its temporal dimension. The two main parts of the paper will discuss, in Part 2, the meaning and role of public policy, and, in Part 3, the impact of the ‘time element’ on public policy. This latter subject includes a discussion of both the point in time as of which public policy is applied, and of the way in which the values embodied in public policy change over the years. Part 4 will briefly note the way in which the concept itself, as distinct from the values that give it content, is evolving. For the most part my discussion is from the perspective of Anglo-Canadian private international law, and its counterparts in other British Commonwealth countries, because that is the system (they can be treated broadly as one system) with which I am most familiar. I will refer as well to sources in the United States and elsewhere to illustrate certain points, but neither space nor time have permitted a truly comparative study.

One of the most difficult topics in both American and European procedural law is the jurisdictional reach of courts over defendants in tort and contract actions. This has become particularly evident with the exponential increase in the use of the Internet as a communication and marketing device. Questions regarding the proper forum in, for example, defamation actions or consumer disputes present difficult questions for both American and European courts. The European Union's adoption of a new Regulation for cases filed on or after 1 March 2002 (the ‘Brussels Regulation’) presents an opportunity for fresh examination of this important topic.

In 1893 the Hague Conference on Private International Law convened for the first time and put also certain matters of family law on its agenda. With respect to the law of husband and wife three conventions were drafted in a short period of time and opened for signature and ratification by the member states:

1. the Convention of 12 June 1902 Governing Conflicts of Laws Concerning Marriage

2. the Convention of 12 June 1902 Governing Conflicts of Laws and Conflicts of Jurisdiction concerning Divorce and Separation

3. the Convention of 17 July 1905 concerning Conflicts of Laws relating to the Effects of Marriage on the Rights and Duties of Spouses inter se and on the Spouses' Property.

Certainly the relationship between time and law is a central item, particularly in civil procedure, since civil litigation constitutes a sequence of acts towards a specific goal. Civil procedure can only be conceived in terms of time. However, the speed at which the interests of individuals in civil litigation are taken care of, depends on the efficiency of the administration of justice. The running of time is here decided by powers other than the persons concerned. This is why the time factor in civil procedure is being explored with a growing intensity.