Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-sh8wx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T17:26:31.098Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Limits Imposed by International Law on Regulation of Extraterritorial Commercial Activity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2017

Isaac N. P. Stokes
Isaac N. P. Stokes*
Affiliation:
Of the New York Bar
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Panel: Extraterritorial Application of Law
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 64 , Issue 4: Proceedings of the American Society of International Law at its Sixty-Fourth Annual Meeting held at New York, N.Y. April 24-26, 1970 , September 1970 , pp. 135 - 141
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1970

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Serbian and Brazilian Loans Cases, P.C.I.J., Ser. A, No. 20/21 at 41(1929); Am. Law Inst. Restatement (2d), Foreign Relations Law of the U. S. (1965) $ 19.

2 In situations such as those of foreign vessels in innocent passage through territorial waters, visiting military forces, diplomatic and consular representatives and premises, and international organizations, international law imposes certain restrictions on the exercise of territorial jurisdiction. See Restatement, note 1 above, Part I, Chs. 3 and 4.

3 As to collisions on the high seas, see Art. 11 of the Convention on the High Seas.

4 A later passage in the opinion apparently confined the rule to intended territorial effects. Ibid. 444.

5 For cases and comments see Restatement (note 1 above) 54; Common Market and American Antitrust: Overlap and Conflict (Rahl, ed.) 50-90 (1970).

6 The King v. Godfrey, [1923] 1 K.B. 24 and other cases cited in Restatement (note 1 above) 55.

7 Act Against Restraints of Competition, í 98(2), as translated in Rahl, note 5 above, at 111.

8 IV/26,267—Dyestuffs; 8 Int. Legal Materials 1330 (1969); CCH Comm. Mkt. Rep. H 9314.

9 Note 1 above.

10 Restatement, note 1 above, § 39.

11 U. S. v. Watchmakers of Switzerland Information Center, be. (S.D.N.Y., 1962), 1963 Trade Cas. 1170,600, order modified, 1965 Trade Cas. Ī 71,352; discussed at length in Rahl, note 5 above, Ch. 6.

12 8 bt. Legal Materials 1305 (1969).

13 Fruehauf Corp. v. S. A. des Automobiles Berliet (Ct. App. Paris, 1965), 85-2 Gazette du Palais; 5 Int. Legal Materials 476 (1966).

14 British Nylon Spinners, Ltd. v. Imperial Chemical Industries, Ltd., [1953] 1 Ch. 19.

15 40 Stat. 516, 15 U.S.C. §§ 61-65.