War and armed conflict — War crimes and crimes against humanity — Responsibility of individuals — London Declaration, 1942 — Moscow Declaration, 1943 — United Nations Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity, 1968 — European Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitation to Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes, 1974 — Charter of the International Military Tribunal for the Prosecution and Punishment of Major War Criminals, 1945 — Australian citizen alleged to have committed war crimes during Second World War in German occupied Ukraine — Accused having no connection with Australia at the time of the commission of the acts — Whether conduct constituted a war crime under the rules of international law — Whether in violation of the laws and customs of war — Whether defence of superior orders available — War Crimes Act 1945 (Commonwealth), as amended, Section 9 and Sections 6, 7(1) and 17 — Whether empowering State to take appropriate action to bring war criminals to justice — Whether “serious crime” under the municipal law of the Commonwealth of Australia — Validity of provisions — Whether exercise of external affairs powers and defence powers — Whether Australia having interest or concern in war crimes committed during Second World War — Whether subject matter of international concern — Commonwealth Constitution, Section 51 (xxix)

Jurisdiction — Universal jurisdiction — Scope — War crimes and crimes against humanity — Enforcement of the laws of war — Principle of universality — Whether crimes against ius gentium — Whether such crimes existed in international law between 1942 and 1943 — Conduct alleged to have taken place outside Australia — Conduct amounting to crimes against international law alleged to have been committed in Ukraine when under German occupation — Australian legislation extending to war crimes committed outside Australia — War Crimes Act 1945 (Commonwealth), as amended — Whether legislation a law with respect to external affairs — Whether valid exercise of legislative power by Parliament — Whether implementing an obligation or concern in international law — Whether Act facilitates the exercise of a right of universal jurisdiction existing in international law — Whether similar to piracy having universal cognizance, sui generis, to be punishable by any nation into whose hands the offender falls — Whether municipal law providing for universal jurisdiction recognized by international law — Whether appropriate courts to exercise universal jurisdiction

Jurisdiction — Extraterritorial jurisdiction — War crimes and crimes against humanity — Australian citizen alleged to have committed war crimes in German occupied Ukraine — Charged with offences against the municipal law of Australia — Legislative power of Parliament to pass laws having extraterritorial effect and to create the offences defined by the Act — Whether extraterritorial conduct having sufficient connection with Australia to enliven the external affairs powers — Whether ex post facto creation of war crimes justified — Whether clear intention of Parliament that the Act have retrospective operation — Whether Commonwealth Parliament in the exercise of its legislative powers may create retrospective law including criminal laws with an ex post facto operation — Whether Act amounts to a bill of attainder — Whether legislative usurpation of judicial power — Commonwealth Constitution, Chapter III — War Crimes Act 1945 (Commonwealth), as amended

Relationship of international law and municipal law — War crimes and crimes against humanity — Relationship between legislative competence in international law and the external affairs powers of the Commonwealth of Australia — Act relating to armed conflict occurring in Europe during Second World War — Whether provisions of the Act giving effect to an obligation arising under international law to translate into municipal law the international law definition of war crimes — Whether provisions of the Act correspond with the provisions of international law — Whether retrospective criminal legislation contrary to international law — Whether breach of the principle of nullum crimen sine lege — Whether statutory exclusion of the defence of superior orders consistent with international law — Nuremberg Charter, Article 6(c) — Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 1948, Article II — War Crimes Act 1945, as amended, Sections 7(3), 6(c) and 9

Treaties — Treaty obligations of States — Geneva Conventions, 1949 — War crimes and crimes against humanity of serious international concern — Australia’s acceptance of legislative obligations implemented into municipal law by the Geneva Conventions Act 1957 (Commonwealth) — Act retrospective in application to war crimes — Geneva Conventions not retrospective in effect — Whether Act breach of the principles nullum crimen sine lege and nulla poena sine lege — Principle of retroactivity — International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966, Article 15(1) — European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, 1950, Article 7 — Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948, Article 11(2) — War Crimes Act 1945 (Commonwealth), as amended, Section 9

Sources of international law — Custom — General practice of States — Opinio juris — War crimes and crimes against humanity — Obligations of States under customary international law in respect of extraterritorial war crimes — War criminals from the pre-1945 years to be sought out and tried — Absence of widespread practice of States exercising such extraterritorial jurisdiction — Whether Australia under any legal obligation to seek out Second World War criminals and to bring them to trial — Whether War Crimes Act 1945, as amended, gives effect to an international obligation — The law of Australia

Aliens — Refugees — Determination of refugee status — Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951 and Protocol, 1967 — Well-founded fear of persecution — Appellant creating by his own actions circumstances that may give rise to persecution if returned to his country of nationality — Whether a refugee sur place — United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees' Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status — Guidance from — Migration Act 1958 (Commonwealth)

Treaties — Interpretation — Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951 and Protocol, 1967 — Materials for guidance in treatment of provisions of Convention — Well-founded fear of persecution — Appellant creating a ground for refugee status by actions in country of refuge — Whether a refugee sur place — United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees' Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status — Guidance from — Whether fear of persecution well-founded — The law of Australia

Aliens — Refugees — Determination of refugee status — Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951 and Protocol, 1967 — Well-founded fear of persecution — Appellant creating by his own actions circumstances that may give rise to persecution if returned to his country of nationality — Whether a refugee sur place — Requirements of bona fides — UNHCR Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status — Guidance from — Migration Act 1958 (Commonwealth)

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Determination of refugee status — Whether appellant refugee sur place — International obligation not brought directly into municipal law — Whether decision-maker to have regard to the Convention in determining refugee status — Whether discretion to be exercised within Convention limits — Whether “error of law” embraces error in construing an international obligation — The law of Australia

Territory — Boundaries — Rivers — New South Wales and Victoria having River Murray as boundary — Whole of the watercourse of the river in New South Wales — Island in the river — Agreement between both States that island in Victoria — Effect of changes in course of river — Lessee of island prosecuted for taking water for irrigation from the river — Whether island no longer in Victoria — Whether “whole of the watercourse ” implied a variable boundary — Imperial Acts of 1850 (c. 59) and 1855 (c. 54)

Rivers — River boundaries — River Murray forming boundary of New South Wales and Victoria — Whole of the watercourse of the river in New South Wales — Island in the river formed by two streams of the river — Siltation in river effecting changes in main stream — Whether affecting status of island — Whether island no longer in Victoria — Whether boundary follows changes in the river — Common law principles regarding changes in the course of rivers by erosion and accretion — The law of Australia

Sea — Continental shelf — Status — Fisheries — Lobster fisheries — Whether lobsters caught above the continental shelf and in fisheries zone “produced” and “processed” in Australia — Whether substantially of Australian origin — Export expansion grants — Export Expansion Grants Act 1978 (Commonwealth) — The law of Australia

States — Right of self-determination of peoples — Recognition as basic principle of international law — Division of Germany after Second World War — Claim of German people to free exercise of right of self-determination — Constitutional duty of Federal Republic of Germany not to take measures to hinder possibility of German reunification

States — Continuity of States — Secession of part of territory of State — Whether affecting identity of State as subject of international law — Status of Germany after 1945 — Whether Federal Republic of Germany is legal successor to German Reich — Continued existence of German Reich under international law — Whether German Democratic Republic to be considered as a foreign State in relation to Federal Republic of Germany — Effect of Treaty on the Basis of Relations between the Federal Republic of Germany and the German Democratic Republic, 1972

Nationality — Acquisition — Requirement of link with territory of State of acquisition — Acquisition of citizenship of German Democratic Republic — Whether having legal effect of acquisition of German nationality recognized in the Federal Republic of Germany pursuant to the Basic Law — Effect of reunification requirement contained in Basic Law

Nationality — Effects of change of sovereignty — Division of Germany — Single German nationality — Preservation — Basic Law of Federal Republic of Germany, Articles 16(1) and 116(1)

Territory — Effects of changes of sovereignty — Legal status of Germany after 1945 — Consequences of Treaty on the Basis of Relations between the Federal Republic of Germany and the German Democratic Republic, 1972

States — Sovereignty and independence — In foreign relations — Power of courts to review executive action — Attempts by Government of the Federal Republic of Germany to secure self-determination for the German people — Whether subject to judicial review — The law of the Federal Republic of Germany

War and armed conflict — Neutrality — Services to belligerents — Right of “angary” — Requisition of neutral ship — Right to compensation — Whether subject to statutory limitation — Whether international law recognizes statutory limitation of claims

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Enforcement of international law — Right of “angary” under international law — Corresponding right to compensation — Whether subject to national law on limitation periods — Whether any rule of international law excluding application of rules of municipal law concerning statutory limitation — The law of Belgium

Jurisdiction — Territorial — Concurrent jurisdiction pursuant to treaty — Civil jurisdiction — Claim for damages — NATO Status of Forces Agreement, 1951 — Article VII(3) — Article VIII(5)(a) — Tort committed in receiving State — Right of action against receiving State — Whether excluding jurisdiction of courts of sending State

Jurisdiction — Territorial — Foreign armed forces — Civil jurisdiction of receiving State — NATO Status of Forces Agreement, 1951 — Belgian forces stationed in Federal Republic of Germany — “Civilian component” — Tort committed in performance of official duties — Claim for damages — Applicable law — Lex loci delicti — The law of Belgium

International organizations — Employees — Immunity — NATO — SHAPE — Entitlement of employees to exemption from taxation in receiving State — Paris Protocol on the Status of International Military Headquarters set up pursuant to North Atlantic Treaty, 1952 — Article 7(2)

International organizations — Employees — Legal status — NATO — SHAPE — Distinction between “civilian component” and civilian personnel — Nationals of receiving State — Status as international civil servants — Paris Protocol, Articles 3(1)(b) and 7(2) — Agreement on the Status of nato, its National Representatives and its International Staff, 1951, Article 17 — The law of Belgium

War and armed conflict — Effects of war — On private contracts — Contract for supply of arms to belligerent State — Arms export embargo by third State — Status of embargo under international law — Whether such legislation is a matter of international public policy — Whether brokerage agreement relating to illegal arms sales enforceable in municipal courts

Economics, trade and finance — Export embargo — Legislative ban on arms sales to belligerent States — Unenforceability of brokerage agreement relating to illegal arms sales — International public policy — The law of Belgium

War and armed conflict — War — Definition — Terrorist attack — Whether constituting an act of war — Explosion caused by dynamite charge hidden in van — Whether constituting an “engine of war” — Claim by victim for compensation from State fund — Qualifying conditions — The law of Belgium

State immunity — Head of foreign State — Property — Immunity from attachment and execution — Whether extending to property of Head of State’s wife and children

State responsibility — For debts — State-owned corporations — Corporation controlled by President of foreign State — Whether President may be sued for debts of corporation

Expropriation — Compensation — Provision for payment of compensation following nationalization of foreign-owned property — Policy of “Zairianisation” — Transfer of assets to Zaire corporation controlled by President of Zaire — Attempt to secure compensation payable by corporation to former shareholders — Attachment of personal assets of President in Belgium — Whether President personally liable for payment of compensation — The law of Belgium

Jurisdiction — Foreign armed forces — NATO military bases in Greenland — Danish nationals living and working on bases — Liability to taxation — Whether subject to taxation by Greenland — NATO Status of Forces Agreement, 1951 — Article X — Agreement between Governments of Denmark and United States of America concerning Defence of Greenland, 1951 — Article VII — Whether any conflict between provisions of the two Agreements concerning tax exemption

States — Constituent territories — Self-governing province — Greenland — Relationship with Denmark — Application of treaties — NATO Status of Forces Agreement, 1951 — Denmark-United States Agreement concerning the Defence of Greenland, 1951

Treaties — Interpretation — Natural meaning — Possible conflict between provisions of bilateral agreement and multilateral treaty involving the same parties — Whether later provisions taking precedence — Municipal legislation referring to bilateral agreement — Interpretation by reference to earlier practice in application of bilateral agreement — The law of Denmark

Jurisdiction — Foreign armed forces — NATO military bases in Greenland — Legal status — Danish nationals living and working on bases — Traffic offences — Whether subject to jurisdiction of Danish courts — Agreement between Governments of United States of America and Denmark concerning Defence of Greenland, 1951 — Articles II and VIII — “Defence areas”

States — Constituent territories — Self-governing province — Greenland — Whether Danish law applicable — The law of Denmark

States — Constituent territories — Self-governing province — Faroe Islands — Whether Danish law applicable — The law of Denmark

Jurisdiction — Territorial — Foreign armed forces — NATO Status of Forces Agreement, 1951 — Preamble and Article VIII(5)(a) and (b) — Claim for damage caused by member of NATO armed “force” — Accident to Belgian military aircraft over Luxembourg territory causing loss of life and damage to property — Claim against Luxembourg as receiving State — Dispute over applicability of Status of Forces Agreement — Whether aircraft operating within framework of NATO — Jurisdiction of Luxembourg courts

State responsibility — Tort — Damage caused by crash of foreign military aircraft — Responsibility of sending and receiving States — NATO Status of Forces Agreement, 1951 — Article VIII(5)(e)(i) — One sending State alone responsible — Fixed distribution of responsibility for payment of award between receiving and sending States — Whether mandatory — Article VIII(5)(f) — Possibility of request to North Atlantic Council to arrange alternative settlement

Air — Military aircraft — Overflight of foreign territory — Requirement of consent — Accident — Liability for damage — NATO Status of Forces Agreement, 1951 — Preamble — Whether requiring consent of receiving State to each specific flight or whether general consent sufficient — Whether tacit general consent may be implied from behaviour of receiving State — Practice in relation to other signatory States to the Agreement

Treaties — Interpretation — Preamble — Extent to which provisions of preamble are enforceable — NATO Status of Forces Agreement, 1951 — Overflight by foreign military aircraft — Consent requirement — Interpretation by reference to State practice — The law of Luxembourg

State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Dispute between two foreign States concerning ownership of immovable property in third State — Competence of courts of State where property located — Scope of entitlement of defendant State to jurisdictional immunity — Restrictive theory of immunity — Acquisition or lease of premises for diplomatic use — Whether performed jure gestionis — Dispute arising in context of dissolution of Union of States and raising issues of public international law — Whether absolute entitlement to jurisdictional immunity in such circumstances

States — Union of States — Legal nature — Distinction between personal and real Union — United Arab Republic — Whether constituting fusion or succession in relation to constituent States — Dissolution of Union — Legal consequences — Dispute concerning ownership of immovable property in third State — Appropriate forum for settlement of dispute

State succession — Union of States — United Arab Republic — Whether both establishment and dissolution of Union constituting cases of State succession — Succession to property rights

Jurisdiction — Territorial — Situs of property — Dispute between two foreign States concerning ownership of immovable property in third State — Whether courts of State of situs of property competent to exercise jurisdiction — Relevance of fact that no other country’s courts competent to exercise jurisdiction — Whether defendant State entitled to claim jurisdictional immunity in such circumstances — Dispute involving questions of public international law — Appropriate forum for settlement of dispute

Diplomatic relations — Diplomatic property — Embassy building — Dispute between two foreign States concerning ownership following dissolution of Union of States — Appropriate forum for settlement of dispute

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Customary international law — Fundamental rights under State Constitution — Action to enforce property rights against foreign State — Claim to immovable property — Whether foreign State entitled to invoke jurisdictional immunity to prevent effective safeguarding of fundamental rights

Human rights — Procedure for enforcement — Fundamental rights under Brazilian Constitution — Right to property — Claim against foreign State for return of immovable property — Whether jurisdictional immunity may be invoked as a bar to claim — The law of Brazil

Human rights — Property rights — Taxes — Proprietary rights in Crown leases of campement sites — Renewal of leases — Liability to pay campement sites tax — Whether amounting to increase in rent — Whether taxing statute a colourable device — Whether proprietary rights protected by the Constitution — Whether deprivation of property without compensation — Campement Sites Tax Act 1983

Human rights — Equality before the law — Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 — International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966, Article 26 — International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966 — Reports to the Human Rights Committee — European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, 1950 — Guidance from — Liability to pay campement sites tax — Whether tax reasonably justifiable in a democratic society — Whether violation of the right to equality before the law or equal treatment of the law — The law of Mauritius

Claims — Compensation for displacement — Mauritius-United Kingdom Treaty, 1982 — Islands of the Chagos Archipelago separated from Mauritius to form part of the British Indian Ocean Territory — Ilois people removed from the Chagos Archipelago to Mauritius — Trust fund for the promotion of the economic and social welfare of the displaced Ilois and the Ilois community — Whether Board of Trustees had obligation to pay compensation to members of the Ilois community — Ilois Trust Fund Act 1982

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — Whether conferring rights upon individuals — Chagos Archipelago Agreement, 1982 between Mauritius and the United Kingdom — Whether creating right enforceable by individual in courts of Mauritius

States — Independence — British Colony of Mauritius — Preparation for independence in 1968 — Territory of the Chagos Archipelago separated from Mauritius — Displacement of Ilois people — Agreement for full settlement of claims — United Kingdom making available £4 million — Mauritius undertaking to establish and administer Ilois Trust Fund — Whether claim of member of Ilois community to be against Mauritius — The law of Mauritius