<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> The 2016 ICRC Commentaries reveal an appreciation that the intensity of violence test which is included in the Common Article 3 understanding of the notion of ‘intensity’ has arrived at a point at which situations formerly regarded as instances of ‘sporadic violence’ have become so violent as to be reclassified as armed conflict not of an international character in that the situation resembles ‘protracted armed violence’. The difficulty lies in determining whether a lower intensity situation is sufficiently violent to constitute a Common Article 3-type non-international armed conflict. The minimum threshold test in relation to the notion of ‘intensity’ in Common Article 3 pertinently is concerned with the relationship between the terms ‘duration’ and ‘intensity’. At what point has a violent situation lasted long enough to exceed our understanding of the meaning of ‘sporadic’ and, thus, has become a non-international armed conflict? Is the method of assessing the level of violence in the context of Common Article 3 limited to a bilateral approach or is an aggregate assessment framework permissible as an application in border-line low-intensity non-international armed conflicts? These questions illustrate the importance of gaining a comprehensive understanding of the phrase ‘protracted armed violence’.</abstract>

Revisiting the Notion of ‘Intensity’ Inherent in Common Article 3: An Examination of the Minimum Threshold Which Satisfies the Notion of ‘Intensity’ and a Discussion of the Possibility of Applying a Method of Cumulative Assessment

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> Over the last forty years the concept of the horizontal positive obligations of the State Parties to the European Convention on Human Rights has been developing in a number of cases of the European Court of Human Rights. This concept extends the protection of Convention rights and freedoms to horizontal relations, that is, to the relations between two private parties. However, the Convention on Human Rights can be violated only by the State; the violation by private parties is not possible, as private parties are not parties to the Conventions. Therefore, the only way to challenge a violation of Convention rights committed by private parties is to link this action to an act or omission of the State, and to claim that the State is responsible for it. This, in turn, requires demonstrating that the Convention obliges the State to protect one individual’s Convention rights from violations committed by other individuals. The State has a wide margin of appreciation as to how it discharges the obligation to protect Convention rights against violations by private individuals.</abstract>

The Role of the European Court of Human Rights in Promoting Horizontal Positive Obligations of the State

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> The aim of this article is to analyse the mutual relationship between arbitrability and public interest. The definition of arbitrability has remained in the domain of national law; there is no internationally unified definition, although a common trend towards the extension of its scope may be observed. There is no doubt about arbitrability in disputes concerning only the individual interests of the parties. However, if the dispute shows elements of public interest, it does not automatically imply that it is not arbitrable. A sign of equation thus cannot be put between public interest and inarbitrability. Disputes arising from economic activities involving public interest can be resolved before the arbitral tribunals. This for instance includes private-law enforcement of competition rules (including EU ones), disputes affected by illegal (criminal) actions, disputes concerning intellectual property rights (in certain countries also with erga omnes effects) or disputes related to insolvency proceedings.</abstract>

Arbitrability and Public Interest in International Commercial Arbitration

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> The social order, and especially the legal order, is implemented and maintained by institutions whose actions are based on the application of various forms of legal constraint. A sanction in the law may take various forms, as diversified in content may be the legislative justifications for them. The article deals with reflection on sanctions. It begins with a linguistic note: “sanction” as a semantic category and a term from juristic language. Then in the theory of law as an element of the structure of the norm. Authors also point out that sanctions exist in normative systems other than the law and they start reasoning by citing the view that the most important goal of establishing sanctions is to prompt adequate motivation of the subjects to comply with the norm (legal or other). In the essential part of the article the authors refer the division and typology of sanctions and theirs construction. In the final and most important part of the article the classical point of view - quoted at the beginning - is confronted with the order of international law, which is sometimes recognized as as lex imperfecta - as the international public law (law of nations) hasn’t developed a system of institutionalized sanctions ensuring observance of its norms. The authors suggest that it is a mistake committed the most frequently by lawyers not expert in international public law unjustifiably and incorrectly transfer the apparatus of notions with precisely assigned significance straight from the theory of domestic (in this case, Polish) law into the sphere of research on public international law. For the international law is shaped as a decentralized structure, within which the question of the execution of behaviours complying with its principles and rules belong to the duties of the subjects of that law-members of international society. The effectiveness, efficiency and purposefulness of the law is not completely nor exclusively conditioned by the existence and type of legal constraint and the international law has not been deprived of the attribute of law. The only real thing is only that a sanction has not always been automatically and immediately applied in case of infringement of a legal duty, since launching a sanction may require a specific legal action on behalf of another entitled subject of international law. </abstract>

Multidimensional and Equivocal: The Theoretical and Philosophical Issues of Legal Sanctions

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> Party autonomy is a recognized concept in commercial arbitration worldwide. The traditional aspect of international arbitration where three arbitrators are appointed has been subject to criticism in the past as well as today. The appointment of a sole arbitrator purportedly allows for shorter arbitration proceedings while appointing three arbitrators tends to prolong international arbitration. The limitations of party autonomy have been moving beyond the old horizons as within current global relations the parties tend to avoid making a decision on the appointment of arbitrators themselves and thus arbitration bodies or tribunals have to act instead of them. The objective of this study is thus to provide an analysis of the issue from a broader viewpoint and to present the differences of opinion together with interesting conclusions across the expert community.</abstract>

Party Autonomy in the Procedure of Appointing Arbitrators

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> The party autonomy, known as one of the basic principles in private law, is one of the fundamental pillars of arbitration and one of the fundamental differences between the arbitration procedure and the proceeding before the ordinary courts. Although a wide degree of party autonomy is provided to the parties in arbitration, this “freedom” is not boundless and is limited by a number of different limitations. This article point out limitations and diversity of national regulations in the matter of appointment of arbitrator.</abstract>

The Autonomy of the Parties’ Free Will and Its Limits When Selecting an Arbitrator

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> The article focuses on the public security exception as it is used in EU migration law. It opens with the public security grounds as they appear in the EU internal market rules and consequently in EU external relations. A special attention is paid to public security restrictions under the Directive 2004/114 as it was interpreted in case Fahimian. The article adds a comparison to other documents in EU external relations and their referrals to public security. The main perspective is the discretion attributed to Member States and their authorities when they apply public security exception especially in relation to regular migration.</abstract>

Discretion of Member States Vis-à-vis Public Security: Unveiling the Labyrinth uf EU Migration Rules

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> Taking care of one’s own health belongs to the diversity of the culture and religion. This concerns not only the conventional medical services on the market but also the traditional medicine. When selecting one‘s own health care, a significant role is played not only by one‘s personal experience but also by one‘s worldview or religious beliefs. The methods of health care differ in the degree of reliability of evidence. Various forms of evidence are established by the law of medicinal drugs. Certain restrictions on health care concern livestock in organic farming. In these cases, the law system favors the homeopathic products before the allopathic ones. Freedom to choose one‘s own health care also concerns natural healing. The Czech law recognizes its practitioners as experts in the private law sense being obliged to act with due care of experts. Natural healing is sometimes associated with religious beliefs. In the Czech Republic there is a constitutional ban on being bound by an exclusive ideology or religion. From the perspective of human rights and biomedicine there is preference of the interests and welfare of human beings to the interests of society or science.</abstract>

Freedom to Choose One’s Own Health Care

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> The decision of legislating the new Criminal Procedure Code made by the Hungarian Government in 2015 was necessary with special reference to the new forms of criminality and criminal investigation. The conception of the new Code on Criminal Procedure (hereinafter: new Code) was accepted by the Government on 11 February in 2015. The directives of the conception were the followings: efficiency, rapidity, simplicity, up-to-dateness, coherency and expediency. Not only the European but also the international requirements and the Hungarian legal traditions were followed by the legislation. Two years after the mentioned decision the new Code was adopted on 13 June 2017, and it will come into force on 1 July 2018. It shall be underlined that many procedural rules will be modified or changed in the new Code. The aim of this study to highlight some changes and amendments in the field of the coercive actions with special reference to the pre-trial detention. The characteristic of the paper will be the analytical and comparative method, and it deals with not only the Act on Criminal Procedure in force (Act XIX of 1998, hereinafter: Act in force), but also the new Code (Act CX of 2017) as well.</abstract>

Comparative Study on the Pre-trial Detention with Reference to the New Hungarian Code on Criminal Procedure

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> This article deals with the types of lawyers‘ monopoly and the related role of the EU recognition directives in the European Union and Slovakia. The European lawyers are benefiting mainly from the title and acts monopolies. The EU directives are influencing the monopoly architecture of European lawyers by creating the shared monopoly and the new title monopoly</abstract>

Les types de monopoles appartenant aux avocats et le rôle des directives de reconnaissance dans l’Union européenne et la Slovaquie

GINEBRA I MOLLINS, Esperança; TARABAL BOSCH Jaume (eds). El Reglamento (UE) 650/2012: su impacto en las sucesiones transfronterizas. Madrid: Marcial Pons, 2016, pp. 479

AHEAD OF PRINT

Volume 23 (2023): Issue 2 (December 2023)

Volume 23 (2023): Issue 1 (August 2023) International Law and the Russian Invasion of Ukraine

Volume 22 (2022): Issue 2 (December 2022)

Volume 22 (2022): Issue 1 (July 2022)

Volume 21 (2021): Issue 2 (December 2021)

Volume 21 (2021): Issue 1 (June 2021)

Volume 20 (2020): Issue 2 (December 2020)

Volume 20 (2020): Issue 1 (June 2020)

Volume 19 (2019): Issue 2 (December 2019)

Volume 19 (2019): Issue 1 (June 2019)

Volume 18 (2018): Issue 2 (December 2018)

Volume 18 (2018): Issue 1 (June 2018)

Volume 17 (2017): Issue 2 (December 2017)

Volume 17 (2017): Issue 1 (June 2017)

Volume 16 (2016): Issue 2 (December 2016)

Volume 16 (2016): Issue 1 (June 2016)

Volume 15 (2015): Issue 2 (December 2015)

Volume 15 (2015): Issue 1 (June 2015)

Volume 14 (2014): Issue 2 (December 2014)

Volume 14 (2014): Issue 1 (June 2014)

Volume 13 (2013): Issue 2 (December 2013)

Volume 13 (2013): Issue 1 (June 2013)

Volume 12 (2012): Issue 2 (December 2012)

Volume 12 (2012): Issue 1 (June 2012)

Volume 11 (2011): Issue 2 (December 2011)

Volume 11 (2011): Issue 1 (June 2011)

International and Comparative Law Review

 International and Comparative Law Review is a peer-reviewed legal journal published by the Faculty of Law, Palacký University Olomouc (Czech Republic) in cooperation with Johannes Kepler Universität in Linz (Austria) and Karl-Franzens Universität in Graz (Austria). The articles are published mostly in English; occasionally contributions in German or French may be also accepted.  The journal has been published since 2001, peer-reviewed is since 2005. It is issued twice a year.  The aim of ICLR is to reflect expert research in the field of International law and EU Law as well as in legal orders both of the Czech Republic and other Member States of the European Union. Here the special emphasis is given to the legal systems of Central European Countries. The journal is comparative by its focus and with respect to this perspective it deals with all areas of law.  Rejection Rate:   40%   Why subscribe and read   Significant contribution to the legal studies in the field of international law, transnational law, EU law and comparative law as well as in related fields of research  Contact with the up-to-date research  Contact with the group of international of scholars   Why submit   Fair and constructive double-blind peer review  Fast and efficient publication process  Commitment to the quality of every article  Wide dissemination of content   Target group  researchers and experts in the field of International law and EU Law   Archiving  Sciendo archives the contents of this journal in Portico - digital long-term preservation service of scholarly books, journals and collections.  Plagiarism Policy  The editorial board is participating in a growing community of Similarity Check System's users in order to ensure that the content published is original and trustworthy. Similarity Check is a medium that allows for comprehensive manuscripts screening, aimed to eliminate plagiarism and provide a high standard and quality peer-review process. 