This thesis critically analyses the Australian law of jurisdiction in private international litigation. Jurisdiction in international litigation is often regarded as a procedural area of law which is less important than choice of law in practical and theoretical terms. There has been little scholarly attention devoted specifically to the study of jurisdiction in Australia. In recent years, jurisdiction has certainly overtaken choice of law in practical importance. This emphasises the need for critical academic study of the law of jurisdiction. This thesis addresses this need. It critically analyses the present principles and the manner in which they are applied, identifies the factors which should influence the law, and proposes appropriate reforms to the principles. This thesis is in five related parts. The first part examines the procedural and constitutional context in which the principles of jurisdiction have been developed and applied. This context has important implications for the law and practice of jurisdiction, which have largely been overlooked in the literature, although they are important in understanding how the principles have developed and how they are applied. The second part critically analyses the present law of jurisdiction. The Australian principles of jurisdiction have not changed substantially in the last 100 years, while economic and social conditions which affect international litigation have undergone dramatic and wide-reaching changes. The present law provides that the courts are jurisdictionally competent in a wide range of cases, which do not all require a substantial connection between the dispute and the forum. The various principles applied in declining jurisdiction make it likely that the Australian courts will exercise their discretion to retain jurisdiction in the majority of cases. Foreign jurisdictional agreements should be enforced by a stay unless there are strong reasons for non- enforcement. But the application of overriding mandatory rules, even where there is a jurisdictional agreement, and the courts' wide discretion under the Australian forum non conveniens principle make it unlikely that the courts will decline to exercise jurisdiction. The present principles, in short, permit the courts to take jurisdiction in too many cases, and require them to decline to exercise jurisdiction in too few cases. The third part examines how the principles on declining jurisdiction operate in practice. This is addressed by a doctrinal and an empirical analysis of the manner in which these principles are applied by the Australian superior courts. These analyses identify factors which appear to influence decisions in practice, not all of which are consistent with the applicable principles. For example, the principle requires the court to enforce foreign jurisdictional agreements unless there are strong grounds for non-enforcement. In practice, strong grounds are easily shown. These analyses show that there are factors which influence decisions which are not always apparent from the principles, suggesting that reform is required. The fourth part identifies the factors which ought to influence the law and practice of jurisdiction. The relevant factors are identified in terms of the interests of foreign states, individual litigants' interests and the forum state's interests. The law and practice of jurisdiction are examined to determine whether those interests do in fact influence law and practice. Many important interests, especially of foreign states and of defendants, are not sufficiently taken into account. This also implies that reform of the principles is warranted. The fifth part considers how Australian jurisdictional principles could be improved. Detailed reforms are suggested, drawing on a discussion and an evaluation of different approaches to jurisdiction, particularly drawing on the European Community's Regulation on Jurisdiction and Judgments. The principles should ensure that the court is jurisdictionally competent only where it is likely to be an appropriate forum for the dispute. The proposed reforms identlfy grounds of exclusive jurisdiction, provide protection to weaker parties to contracts, and otherwise require the enforcement of jurisdictional agreements. Default rules of jurisdiction which are likely to indicate a strong connection between the forum and the dispute are proposed. Specific principles for declining jurisdiction are also proposed. Retention of the forum non conveniens principle is recommended, but the English principle is advocated as a more suitable and just approach. This thesis is intended to contribute both to a theoretical understanding of this area of law and to an understanding of its practical application.

La réflexion sur le tiers dans le contentieux international a pour origine le constat d’une présence accrue des tiers dans le cadre du règlement juridictionnel des différends internationaux, questionnant la vision traditionnelle du procès international comme étant « la chose des parties ». Le tiers est défini négativement, comme toute entité qui n’est ni l’organe juridictionnel, ni les parties à l’instance. Tout au long de l’étude, il est procédé à une identification plus précise de cette notion à géométrie variable : selon la juridiction considérée et le type de procédure examiné, le tiers est un Etat, une organisation internationale, une personne privée physique ou morale. Dans le cadre d’un corpus de juridictions varié, la place du tiers dans le contentieux international est étudiée, en examinant successivement les aspects relevant de sa protection et de sa participation dans le contentieux international. En filigrane, l’étude appréhende la contribution des tiers au maintien de la paix, dans le cadre du règlement pacifique juridictionnel des différends internationaux. / The reflection on third entities in international litigation comes from the finding of an increased presence of “thirds” in the jurisdictional settlement of international disputes, thus questioning the traditional vision of the international trial as being “the thing of the parties”. The “third” is defined negatively, as any entity that is neither the jurisdiction nor the parties to the proceedings. Throughout the study, a more precise identification of this notion is developed : depending on the jurisdiction in question and the type of procedure examined, third entities are either States, international organizations, private (physical or moral) persons. Within the framework of diverse jurisdictions, the study apprehends the place given to third entities in international litigation, examining successively their protection and their participation. In the background, the study looks at the contribution of third entities to peacekeeping, as part of the peaceful settlement of disputes.

L’exécution des décisions juridictionnelles internationales soulève l’une des questions, sinon la question fondamentale qu’implique l’autorité des arrêts rendus par la plus haute instance juridictionnelle des Nations Unies : comment assurer de manière effective, en droit comme en fait, la mise en oeuvre de sentences dont l’autorité juridique est indéniable certes, mais évidemment assujettie à la (bonne) volonté des États ? D’ordinaire deux réponses semblent possibles : par l’exécution spontanée ou l’exécution forcée. Pourtant, l’expérience de la mise en œuvre de l’arrêt rendu le 10 octobre 2002 dans l’affaire de la Frontière terrestre et maritime entre le Cameroun et le Nigeria se démarque de ce schéma classique. Elle n’est ni spontanée, ni forcée mais provoquée. Devant le caractère dérisoire des sanctions possibles en cas d’inexécution, le réalisme diplomatique vient au secours de l’effectivité de la chose jugée. En effet, l’ONU (l’organe judiciaire principal et le Secrétaire général) met en place un dispositif de provocation de la négociation dans l’exécution du futur arrêt, pour n’avoir pas à intervenir sur le fondement de l’article 94 § 2 de la Charte. Dans cette hypothèse la plus sensible dans le domaine de l’exécution des arrêts de la CIJ : celle où la Cour attribue un territoire disputé à un État alors qu’un autre État l’occupe en fait, l’alchimie entre procédure juridictionnelle et procédure négociée s’avère efficace. L’exécution de l’arrêt revêt en outre une dimension originale supplémentaire grâce aux mécanismes sui generis tels que la Commission mixte Cameroun Nigeria et l’accord post-juridictionnel parrainé par l’ONU et les puissances tutrices. On ne peut avoir meilleure illustration de la contribution de l’Afrique à l’effectivité des décisions de la CIJ, comme au règlement pacifique des différends internationaux. / The implementation of international judicial decisions raises one of the questions, if not the fundamental one related to the authority of the decisions rendered by the highest Court of the United Nations. In fact the question is How to ensure effectively, the implementation of sentences whose legal authority is undeniable, but certainly and obviously depending of the (good) will of the States, in law and in fact. Usually two answers seem possible: spontaneous implementation or enforcement. However the experience of the implementation of the Judgment in Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria disregard this classic pattern. This is a preventive and early implementation by the parties and third parties, and then a delayed but effective implementation. It led to a probably unique approach in the settlement of judicial disputes. Indeed it is the first time that the UN (i. e ICJ which is the main judicial organ and the Secretary General) without delay for the foreseeable implementation’s difficulties to get involved under Article 94 § 2 of the Charter establishes an early and preventive diplomatic system of implementation. In the view of the ridiculous nature of possible sanctions for non-compliance, the diplomatic realism came to the rescue of the effectiveness of the res judicata. In this most sensitive field in implementing the judgments of the ICJ, the hypothesis in which the Court assigns a disputed territory to a state while another state occupies it in fact and of the hostility of the local populations to the change of the sovereign de facto, the merge between judicial procedure and negotiated procedure is effective. The implementation of this judgment is also original because of its sui generis mechanisms in implementing the decision such as the United Nations Joint Commission or the post-jurisdictional Agreement sponsored by the UN and witnesses States. There is no better example of the African contribution to the effectiveness of the decisions of the ICJ, as far as the peaceful settlement of international disputes is concerned.

Cette thèse porte sur le statut de l'Etat justiciable en droit international. L'étude de l'Etat, sujet de droit international et justiciable des juridictions internationales, conduit à l'analyse de sa personnalité juridique internationale. Pour connaître le statut juridique de l'Etat et sa possible mise en cause devant une juridiction internationale, il a fallu donner un essai de définition du concept d'Etat et de celui de souveraineté. C'est à partir de la variante souveraineté que se décline le phénomène de justiciabilité de l'Etat en droit international. Dans cette étude, le nouveau droit international tel que proposé par la Charte des Nations en 1945, maintient l'Etat dans son rôle classique de sujet principal du droit des gens, en lui étant tout de même le statut de souverain absolu et inaccessible. En plus du contentieux interétatique classique, le souverain étatique est devenu depuis cette date un acteur contentieux presque banal devant les nouvelles juridictions internationales. C'est ainsi que l'émergence de nouveaux acteurs de la société internationale comme les individus, les entreprises et les ONG, a donné lieu à un nouveau développement conventionnel dans des espaces juridiques qui échappent au contrôle étatique. La protection internationale des droits de l'homme fait passer l'individu de la sphère nationale à la sphère internationale. Le nouveau droit international économique institutionnalisé par le CIRDI en 1965, le nouveau droit de la mer matérialisé par la Convention de Montego Bay de 1982 et le développement des juridictions pénales internationales (lutte contre l'impunité) sont la preuve d'une transformation de l'environnement juridique international où l'Etat n'est plus l'unique centre d'intérêt des rapports internationaux. / This thesis examines the status of the defendant State in international law. The study of State, subject of international law and immune from international courts, led to the analysis of its international legal personality. To know the legal status of the State and its possible questioned before an International Court, it took to give a definition of the concept of sovereignty and state test. It is from the variant sovereignty comes the phenomenon of justiciability of the State under international law. In this study, new international law as proposed by the Charter in 1945, maintains the State in his classic role as main subject of the law of Nations, by taking away all the same absolute and inaccessible sovereign status. In addition to the classical inter-State disputes, the sovereign State has become since that date an almost banal litigation player before the new international courts. It is as well as the emergence of new actors in the international society as individuals, businesses and NGOS, gave rise to a new conventional development in legal spaces that are outside State control. The international protection of human rights puts the individual in the national sphere to the international sphere. The new international economic law, institutionalized by the ICSID in 1965, the new law of the sea, materialized by the Montego Bay Convention of 1982 and the development of international criminal courts (Fight against impunity) are evidence of a transformation of the international legal environment where the State is no longer the only main interest of international reports.

The thesis defines legal status of Liechtenstein in the European Economic Area. It is divided into three consecutive chapters. The first chapter consists of two parts - general and economic characteristics of Liechtenstein. The general characteristic is based on the author's experience supported by scientific literature, while economic subchapter is based largely on statistical data. The second chapter focuses on the legal status of Liechtenstein and its position on international scene. The position is viewed from two perspectives, which affects it the most. First, from the perspective of participation in selected international organizations and second, the influence of close relationship with Switzerland. The last chapter analyses international litigation to which Liechtenstein is a party. The aim of this thesis is to define the legal relations of Liechtenstein, which forms its position, using the methods of analysis.

La réparation des dommages causés aux particuliers est une thématique ancienne en droit international. Toutefois, elle a été longuement appréhendée au seul prisme des relations interétatiques, l’individu n’étant perçu que comme un objet du droit international. Le bouleversement introduit par la protection internationale des droits de l’homme quant au statut de l’individu dans cet ordre juridique invite donc à une relecture de cette question. Les obligations substantielles contractées par les Etats en matière de protection internationale des droits de l’homme devraient logiquement trouver un prolongement dans l’existence d’une obligation de ces derniers de réparer les dommages causés aux particuliers. Or, l’identification d’une telle obligation s’avère délicate, tant au regard de ses créanciers que de son étendue. Sa réalisation est quant à elle laissée en grande partie aux mains du juge. Il s’avère donc malaisé de dégager un véritable régime juridique de la réparation des dommages causés par la violation des droits de l’homme. / The reparation of damage caused to individuals is a former thematic issue of international law. However, its development has been studied only from the point of view of interstate relations as soon as the individual was conceived and treated as an object, not as a subject of international law. The change, brought by the international protection of human rights relating to the status of individual, in this legal order, suggests to re-open the debate on this matter. As a result, the compelling obligations undertaken by member states regarding international protection of human rights, should logically lead to the existence of an obligation for the latter to repair the damage caused to the private individuals. But identifying such an obligation remains delicate both with regard to his creditors and with regard to its scope. Its implementation is left largely with the hands of the judge. It is therefore difficult to find a genuine legal regime for the reparation of damages caused by the violation of human rights.

Les conventions internationales de protection des droits de l’Homme ont été élaborées au début de la seconde moitié du XXe siècle. Or, le champ matériel de ces traités est étroitement connecté aux réalités humaines, elles-mêmes en constante évolution, et les développements technologiques, sociaux, économiques ou scientifiques peuvent avoir des implications directes sur l’exercice des droits et libertés fondamentaux. L’interprétation évolutive des ces instruments, consistant à les envisager « à la lumière des conditions actuelles », est alors devenue courante dans la pratique des juridictions spécialisées, bien qu’elle soit parfois envisagée avec méfiance. Absente des règles d’interprétation du droit international formulées dans la Convention de Vienne sur le droit des traités, cette modalité interprétative intrigue dans la mesure où elle conduit le juge à s’écarter parfois explicitement du texte de l’accord et donc de la volonté des parties. L’interprétation évolutive invite par conséquent à une réévaluation de la fonction interprétative du juge international, entre son encadrement théorique traditionnellement strict et les exigences empiriques du droit international contemporain / Human rights treaties have been adopted at the end of the first half of the XXth century, in a technological, social and economic context which has since then deeply evolved. To maintain the effectiveness and relevance of those treaties, specialised jurisdictions have therefore increasingly interpreted their provisions in light of current living conditions. This method, called evolutive interpretation of treaties, is still looked at with suspicion. Indeed, it is not recognised by the Vienna Convention on the law of treaties and it may lead the judge to depart from the parties intention as expressed in the text of the convention. The evolutive interpretation of treaties invites therefore to reconsider the international judge’s interpretative function, between its strict theoretical conception and the empirical needs of contemporary international law

Dans l’ère économique actuelle où les transactions commerciales, propulsées par l’omniprésence des technologies de l’information, se font de plus en plus à l’échelle mondiale, les risques de conflits juridiques de nature internationale augmentent considérablement. Les entreprises québécoises faisant plus fréquemment affaire avec des partenaires étrangers, les litiges d’aujourd’hui confrontent les parties et leurs représentants à des dilemmes légaux nouveaux qui les forcent à interagir avec des cultures judiciaires, autres que québécoises, et ce, particulièrement lors de la communication au préalable de la preuve civile. Nous nous pencherons donc sur l’analyse des divers enjeux légaux soulevés par ce processus afin de relever les considérations pratiques auxquelles seront soumises les parties à un conflit commercial international institué devant les tribunaux québécois. Ainsi, à l’aide d’un cas hypothétique, nous effectuerons l’étude des régimes procéduraux québécois, tant général que particulier, de communication de la preuve civile internationale, les restrictions applicables à la procédure ainsi que son encadrement supranational. Puis, nous étudierons l’impact des technologies de l’information sur le régime québécois de communication au préalable de la preuve civile en mettant l’accent tout particulièrement sur la dématérialisation de la preuve civile internationale, les changements législatifs de la réforme du Code de procédure civile et la protection des renseignements personnels. / In the current economic era, where business transactions are more than ever globalized due to the increasing use of technologies, the risks of legal conflicts being international in nature are now higher. Since businesses from Québec are now frequently making transactions with foreign partners, litigation nowadays confronts parties and their lawyers with new legal dilemmas, forcing them to interact with different judicial cultures other than Québec’s, especially during the pre-trial discovery and disclosure process. We will then analyze the many legal challenges resulting from this procedure to address the practical considerations that subject the parties of an international litigation instituted in front of Québec’s tribunals. Therefore, with the help of a hypothetical, we will study Québec’s general and specific procedures of discovery and disclosure of international civil evidence, its restrictions and the international legal frame surrounding it. Also, we will discuss the impact of technologies on Québec’s pre-trial discovery and disclosure process focusing on the dematerialization of civil evidence, the legislative modifications of the reform of the Québec Code of Civil Procedure, and the protection of personal data.