Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1028064
 
 

Footnotes (77)



 


 



Must Treaty Violations Be Remedied? A Critique of Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon


John Bernard Quigley


Ohio State University (OSU) - Michael E. Moritz College of Law

November 2007

Ohio State Public Law Working Paper No. 110

Abstract:     
In its 2006 decision in Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon, the Supreme Court of the United States declined to provide a requested remedy for a treaty violation on the grounds that the particular remedy was not mentioned in the treaty itself. The article criticizes this approach by the Court to remedies. In treaty law, as in domestic contract law, remedies need not be specified in the agreement. They are found in a separate body of law. The Supreme Court ignored this body of law. The article explains how remedies are provided in international law for treaty violations and suggests that the Supreme Court apply this body of law in future cases of treaty violations.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 18

Keywords: Vienna Convention, Consular Relations, law of state responsibility, Amiable Isabella

JEL Classification: K33, K41, K42

working papers series


Download This Paper

Date posted: November 9, 2007  

Suggested Citation

Quigley, John Bernard, Must Treaty Violations Be Remedied? A Critique of Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon (November 2007). Ohio State Public Law Working Paper No. 110. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1028064 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1028064

Contact Information

John Bernard Quigley (Contact Author)
Ohio State University (OSU) - Michael E. Moritz College of Law ( email )
55 West 12th Avenue
Columbus, OH 43210
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 509
Downloads: 94
Download Rank: 163,605
Footnotes:  77

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.344 seconds