John Erskine Read, Q.C., D.C.L., LL.D., was born in Halifax, Nova Scotia, on July 5, 1888, and died on December 3, 1973, in the words of his friend Max Wershof “full of mental vigour to the last.” After graduating in Dalhousie Law School in 1909, he completed a year’s post-graduate study in Columbia University, New York. As a Rhodes scholar he then went to University College, Oxford, where he took a “double first” in winning his B.A. and B.C.L. In 1913 he was called to the Nova Scotia bar, joining the firm of Harris, Henry, Rogers and Harris. After distinguished service with the Canadian Field Artillery in World War I, in which he was wounded and invalided out with the acting rank of Major, he returned to that firm as a partner in 1918. In 1920 he joined the Faculty of Law of Dalhousie University, and was Dean between 1924 and 1929. In 1929 he was appointed Legal Adviser of the Department of External Affairs and held that position until he was elected a member of the International Court of Justice on February 6, 1946.

La Relation Geographique entre le Canada et les Etats-Unis est unique. Ensemble, ils occupent la majeure partie du continent nord-américain tout en s’individualisant l’un de l’autre par une frontière politique est-ouest (de l’Atlantique au Pacifique) et nord-sud (entre l’Alaska et le Yukon) qui totalise plus de 6,500 kilomètres de longueur. Les côtes canadiennes et américaines sont baignées par trois océans et les plateaux continentaux adjacents à ces côtes occupent respectivement, selon la classification mondiale, le deuxième et le troisième rang quant à leur superficie.

The Arctic Waters in general and those of the Northwest passage in particular have been conspicuously absent from discussions in the Third Law of the Sea Conference. This does not mean, however, that a Convention of general application resulting from the Conference might not affect their legal status. Indeed, it might be possible to say already that the straits question is virtually settled and that the provisions of the Informal Composite Negociating Text, hereinafter referred to simply as the I.C.N.T., relating to passage through “straits used for international navigation” (Part III) and “archipelagic States” (Part IV), will be adopted without significant substantive changes. There have been no such changes since the Revised Single Negotiating Text of May 6, 1976, and the general consensus is that this issue of straits, once considered so difficult to resolve as possibly to cause failure of the Conference, is now settled.

The Principles that have been collected in the following pages outline some of the problems raised by the codification and progressive development of international law on water pollution. These principles have been formulated with reference to international agreements mostly concluded since the adoption of the Helsinki Rules (1966) and having regard to the vast documentation recently produced on the subject by various international bodies.

It is not difficult to select a limited number of principles as the most representative of the topic. The real problem is how to interpret them in terms of international legal rights and duties, because, either we rely on positive treaty law, and then are faced with the doubt that the provisions under inspection evidence the lack — not the existence — of a corresponding general principle; or we move from an abstract notion of water pollution that can only be defined by damage and whose legal implications cannot be appreciated except with reference to international responsibility, circumstances, and equity.

It was Reported in july 1979 that Dr. Luisa Mistrali-Guidotti, a missionary doctor serving in Zimbabwe-Rhodesia, had been shot and killed by government troops while making her rounds in her “familiar” ambulance car near Mtoko. She had previously been threatened with arrest for attending to wounded guerrillas. Except for the fact that she had been killed, rather than taken prisoner and mistreated or tortured, her case had much in common with that of Dr. Sheila Cassidy, who in 1976 had been imprisoned and tortured for her services to Allende supporters during the Chilean revolution. Incidents such as these serve to emphasize that the medical profession is as much prone to the risks of armed conflict as is everybody else.

The First Part of this article outlined the choice of law methods developed by French and German law for problems relating to the substantial or essential validity of contracts, leaving aside the complicated matters of formation and capacity. This part will deal in the same way with the laws of the United States. A concluding part in the next volume of the Yearbook will deal with Anglo-Canadian law and will glance, by way of postscript, at a draft convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations that has been put forward recently by the Commission of the European Communities.

The Growth of containerization and new transport technologies has encouraged widespread use of the international multimodal transport of goods. This development has given birth to the multimodal transport operator (MTO) who, contracting as a principal and not necessarily being a carrier, undertakes complete responsibility vis-à-vis a consignor for the transport of the consignor’s goods from the place of origin or acceptance situated in one country to the place of final destination or delivery situated in another country. The multimodal transport contract, which is sui generis, provides for the MTO to furnish or procure transport on each stage of the transport, whether by air, inland waterway, sea, rail, or road. There will be no contractual relationship between the original consignor and the stage carriers or even non-carriers (for example, warehousemen) who will be subcontractors of the MTO.

Il Semble Qu’une dizaine d’années soit une bonne moyenne pour la conclusion de chacun des travaux du Sous-Comité juridique du Comité de l’Utilisation pacifique de l’Espace extra-atmosphérique des Nations Unies. En effet, presque dix ans se sont écoulés entre la première référence faite au besoin d’établir des principes juridiques sur les questions relatives à la lune et autres corps célestes et l’approbation du projet “d’Accord régissant les activités des Etats sur la lune et autre corps célestes” à la trente-quatrième session de l’Assemblée générale des Nations Unies en 1979.

On March 29, 1979 Canada and the United States signed a treaty to submit their dispute over the maritime boundary in the Gulf of Maine to binding settlement. The event is worthy of note not only because it is the first occasion since the North Atlantic Coast Fisheries Arbitration, in 1910, that the two countries have submitted a dispute over their offshore jurisdiction to third party settlement but also because it constitutes the first reference by any state of a question to a chamber of the International Court of Justice. However, this reference to the Court is only conditional and the parties have provided for the possible removal of the case from the Court and for its submission to an ad hoc court of arbitration. Thus, as well as providing a further opportunity for an international tribunal to consider the law relating to the delimitation of maritime boundaries, the treaty raises some interesting questions about recourse to a chamber of the International Court of Justice.

Despite Former External Affairs Minister Donald Jamieson’s claim that Canada had “been the Number One peace-keeping country in the world,” Canadian participation in the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (U.N.I.F.I.L.) in 1978 was limited to the initial period of six months and solely for logistic support. The cautious position taken by the Liberal government is understandable in view of the volatile situation prevailing in Lebanon for a number of years and the many uncertainties confronting U.N.I.F.I.L., which since its inception has been called “the most difficult peace-keeping operation ever launched by the Organization.”

In 1971 The International Court of Justice in an Advisory Opinion on the Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia concluded that the mandate for South-West Africa had been validly terminated by the General Assembly in Resolution 2145 (XXI) of October 27, 1966, and that “the continued presence of South Africa in Namibia being illegal, South Africa is under an obligation to withdraw its administration from Namibia immediately and thus put an end to its occupation of the Territory.” Further, the Court said that:

States Members of the United Nations are under obligation to recognize the illegality of South Africa’s presence in Namibia and the invalidity of its acts on behalf of or concerning Namibia, and to refrain from any acts and, in particular, any dealings with the Government of South Africa implying recognition of the legality of or lending support or assistance to, such presence and administration.

A tangible Result of recent initiatives of the A.A.L.C.C. in the field of international trade law and practice has been the creation of centres for commercial arbitration in Kuala Lumpur and Cairo. The centres are intended to be one component of an integrated regional system for the settlement of trade and investment disputes. That the centres were established on the recommendation of and under the auspices of the A.A.L.C.C. is evidence of the Committee’s growing importance as a regional intergovernmental body concerned with issues of international law and institutional relations.