Brown offers an examination of the jurisprudence of a range of international courts and tribunals relating to issues of procedure and remedies, and assessment whether there are emerging commonalities regarding these issues which could make up a unified law of international adjudication.

Brown offers an examination of the jurisprudence of a range of international courts and tribunals relating to issues of procedure and remedies, and assessment whether there are emerging commonalities regarding these issues which could make up a unified law of international adjudication.

Recent years have seen a proliferation of international courts and tribunals, which has given rise to several new issues affecting the administration of international justice. This book makes a signification contribution to understanding the impact of this proliferation by addressing oneimportant question: namely, whether international courts and tribunals are increasingly adopting common approaches to issues of procedure and remedies. This book's central argument is that there is an increasing commonality in the practice of international courts to the application of rulesconcerning these issues, and that this represents the emergence of a common law of international adjudication.This book examines this question by considering several key issues relating to procedure and remedies, and analyses relevant international jurisprudence to demonstrate that there is susbstantial commonality. It goes on to look at why international courts are increasingly adopting common approachesto such questions, and why a greater degree of commonality may be found with respect to some issues rather than others. In doing so, light is shed on the methods adopted by international courts to engage in the cross-fertilization of legal principles.The emergence of a common law of international adjudication has important practical and theoretical implications, as it suggests that international courts can also devise common approaches to the challenges that they face in the age of proliferation. It also suggests that international courts do notgenerally operate as self-contained regimes, but rather that they regard themselves as forming part of a community of international courts, therefore having positive implications for the development of an truly international legal system.

The book presents international commercial courts from a comparative perspective and highlights their role in transnational adjudication.

This book investigates how international adjudicators defer to State decision-making authority, and what that reveals about the domestic-international interface.

Offers a new understanding of traditional rules on jurisdiction and admissibility of cases before international courts and tribunals.

The vast majority of all international judicial decisions have been issued since 1990. This increasing activity of international courts over the past two decades is one of the most significant developments within the international law. It has repercussions on all levels of governance and has challenged received understandings of the nature and legitimacy of international courts. It was previously held that international courts are simply instruments of dispute settlement, whose activities are justified by the consent of the states that created them, and in whose name they decide. However, this understanding ignores other important judicial functions, underrates problems of legitimacy, and prevents a full assessment of how international adjudication functions, and the impact that it has demonstrably had. This book proposes a public law theory of international adjudication, which argues that international courts are multifunctional actors who exercise public authority and therefore require democratic legitimacy. It establishes this theory on the basis of three main building blocks: multifunctionality, the notion of an international public authority, and democracy. The book aims to answer the core question of the legitimacy of international adjudication: in whose name do international courts decide? It lays out the specific problem of the legitimacy of international adjudication, and reconstructs the common critiques of international courts. It develops a concept of democracy for international courts that makes it possible to constructively show how their legitimacy is derived. It argues that ultimately international courts make their decisions, even if they do not know it, in the name of the peoples and the citizens of the international community.