Few subjects are as controversial in international law today as the taking of foreign property. Many of the developing countries assembled within the framework of the semi-official Group of 77 (G. 77) claim that many of the principles and rules pertaining to the protection of foreign property traditionally adhered to by Western developed countries have lost their legal significance; in particular, as a result of legal developments induced by relevant UN resolutions. The question is, to what extent this claim is correct; to what extent the traditional rules have indeed been replaced by new ones, and what the contents of these new rules might be. The present study tries to answer this question, and sets out to review and analyze: first, the main doctrines of traditional customary law concerning the taking of foreign property (Part 2); secondly, the relevant UN resolutions relative to this subject (Part 3); and thirdly, state practice as it manifests itself in the form of one multilateral and 195 bilateral investment protection treaties concluded up to 1983, both between developed and developing countries and amongst developing countries inter se. (Part 4). On the basis of this review and analysis conclusions are drawn in Part 5.

In any field of legal study, there are certain terms which, while not corresponding to distinct fundamental concepts, come to acquire currency as regular symbols or building-blocks in legal argument, either through their inclusion in some key text, or through being recognised as convenient encapsulation of a bundle of concepts or conditions. The generally well-recognised danger in the use of such symbolic notation is that the term in question may come to be used with insufficient regard to the nucleus of ideas which existed before it was affixed as a label, and the manipulation of which it was merely intended to facilitate. Furthermore, what may be called the “common” meaning of the term in question – the meaning it has in a non-legal or non-specialist dictionary – may exercise a surreptitious influence, causing the legal meaning of the term to drift in a manner unjustified by legal considerations. For these reasons, such terms need to be scrutinised from time to time in the light of their origin and background, in order that such drifts may be detected, and the danger avoided of legal exactitude being prejudiced by linguistic convenience.

The scope of application of Articles 85 and 86 of the EEC Treaty is not limited to undertakings which have been established within the Community. Undertakings which have been established outside the Community and which restrain competition inside the Common Market can come within the scope of application of the EEC competition law. In a growing Number of cases, the EuropeanCommission and the Court of Justice of the EEC have applied the Articles 85 and 86 to undertakings which had their seats in third countries.

The purpose of this report is to consider the provision on removal of disused installations, contained in Article 60.3 of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, in particular its history and scope, its further elaboration by “standards” to be established by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and other relevant questions. The questions to be considered with regard to the removal obligation include more specifically:

a) the position under the corresponding provision of the 1958 Continental Shelf Convention;

b) the position under customary international law;

c) the effect of Article 60.3 of the new Convention pending its entry into force, and thereafter;

d) the question of jus constituendum, i.e. the standards to be evolved in IMO or other appropriate international organizations;

e) the relation between rights and obligations derived from a) to d) above and those based on other international instruments such as in particular the Oslo and London Dumping Conventions of 1972.

After years of preparation the Convention on the Law of Treaties was concluded in Vienna on 23 May 1969; it was about another ten years before the Convention entered into force on 27 January 1980. Shortly afterwards, the Government of the Netherlands decided to initiate the constitutional procedure required to become a party to the Convention. For that purpose, a Bill of Approval was submitted to the States-General in March 1983.