Domestic Court Reactions to UN Security Council Sanctions
This chapter provides evidence that, while Kadi was an important decision, different perspectives on the underlying subject-matter were taken by various national courts. This is the due to the fact that increasingly, individuals blacklisted by the Security Council or otherwise affected by its decisions are trying to challenge such UN acts before national courts. In particular, the Swiss Supreme Court in Nada, the Canadian Federal Court in Abdelrazik, the Irish High Court in Bosphorus, the English High Court and ultimately the ECJ in the Othman case, as well as the English High Court and the UK Supreme Court in the Hay case provide evidence on national court decisions that rule on the scope of their power to review UN Security Council resolutions. In doing so, different forms of engagement methods can be distinguished, ranging from abstention, low intensity review, consistent interpretation to the annulment of the domestic measure, all confirming the working hypotheses.
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.