Search Results

While dependency relations between developed and Third World countries are being redefined, a number of Western participants and thinkers challenge the Third World ideology and its recommended models of action.Taking into account the fact of colonization, the round table participants bring numerous precisions to clarify the debate. Many dimensions are interrelated: the world economic crisis, imperialism consolidation, national liberation struggles, as well as the balance in North-South relations are at the heart of the debate. However, the claims of Third World countries and their liberating values still seem justified.

The text explores the state of the law of contracts under civil and common law in Canada. Specifically, it addresses two distinct situations, one where the intention of contracting parties is to be governed exclusively by their contractual clauses and one where the contract is governed by non-state rules such as usage, general principles of law, lex mercatoria, etc. In both cases, are these contracts nevertheless submitted to State law? And if so, which one? Are the answers to these questions different when the contract is subject to arbitration? If this is the case, is there any justification for such a difference? The Inter American Convention on the Law Applicable to International Contracts (1994) as well as the current revision of the Rome Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations (1980), neither of which Canada is a Party, to provide some insight to this topic.

Some topics appear recurring in international law doctrine and international law subjects are obviously one of those. If sovereign States are classically recognized as the first and unique subject of international law, the multiplication of actors on the international scene leads other entities to pretend to achieve this craving status. In front of the doctrine's variations and hesitations, practice, taking the form of case law and positive law, shows an evident pragmatism towards non-state actors (either natural person or legal entity). They indeed progressively recognize to these other international actors that the traditional doctrine excludes (excluded?) from the closed category of subjects of international law, rights and obligations. Faced with this situation, the doctrine is somehow forced to evolve. The reciprocal dialogue between practice and doctrine allows then international law to grow up towards adulthood taking into account the reality and diversity of contemporary international relations. The diversification of international law subjects is therefore not a useless complexity of international law, but the sign of its developing maturity.

In May 2011, the Premier of Quebec officially launched the Plan Nord. This development and enhancement project for northern Quebec has two complementary objectives: optimize the exploitation of natural resources for economic and commercial purposes and build a new social space in the north of the province by expanding the frontiers of the ecumene. The idea is not new insofar as the North has frequently been a key concern among Quebec leaders. Yet, past projects to develop Quebec's northern region, all of them eager to tap into the abundant untouched resources of this territory, did not lead to the anticipated results. Among the challenges facing these projects were, in particular, fluctuations in the global commodities markets. Plan Nord, for its part, which is presented as a sustainable development project, is unique in that it aims to harmonize large-scale mining operations with the goal of biodiversity protection in partnership with Indigenous peoples. Thus, this project is based on a set of technical, administrative, financial, legislative and regulatory measures whose half-avowed aim is to legitimize its realization and above all to bolster the attractiveness and competitiveness of Northern Quebec on the world stage in the eyes of investors from the mining industry.

Keywords: développement, Nord-du-Québec, ressources naturelles, exploitation minière, développement durable, development, Nord-du-Québec, natural resources, mining, sustainable development, Plan Nord

After the failure of Copenhagen in 2009, doctrine has talked about a multilateralism in crisis. This multilateralism characterized by state equality, reciprocity and continuity has appeared utterly incapable of bringing good cooperation between States so as to reach the adoption of a binding agreement to organize the fight against climate warming. This multilateralism is usually opposed to alliances occasionally formed and characterised by a geopolitical logic of power, of selectivity. The Copenhagen failure has brought forward this tough geopolitical logic (hard gaps were created between developed and developing States, emerging economies) revealing a very weak climate governance that was striving to cope with an already very complex and multiscale issue. As numerous political scientists have proposed other suggestions, many States have preferred the very limited structure of clubs. The COP 21 and the Paris agreement have put back on track the UN process that was gridlocked even if the oppositions of viewpoints have not vanished and the coalitions of interests are remaining. The solution of multilateralism that enables a balance and flexible solution between unilateralism and the partly binding character of the agreement explains this success as well as the increase involvement of civil society.

Keywords: multilatéralisme, gouvernance climatique, ONU, minilatéralisme, États, société civile, accords contraignants, multilateralism, climate governance, UN, minilateralism, States, civil society, binding agreements

Is there necessarily a fundamental antagonism in the relation between nuclear law and environmental law? One often has the impression that the persistent reticence towards nuclear energy in many circles results in undermining the credibility of the rules governing the use of this source of energy. The lasting memory of Chernobyl – as the archetypal environmental catastrophe – does not help of course. This perception is not only unfair – which is irrelevant – it is factually and conceptually wrong since the very purpose of the international and national nuclear law, as lex specialis, is to ensure that the many applications of nuclear energy are carried out in a manner which is safe for the public and the environment. When studying nuclear law, one is naturally inclined to compare it with the younger but quickly expanding sphere of environmental laws, and wonder to what extent the latter overlaps or may even eventually absorb the former, considering that the finality of both branches is, to a certain degree, identical and that they share many of the same legal tools. Indeed, through what might be qualified as “cross-fertilization process”, each branch has borrowed principles and concepts from the other (traceability of nuclear material, polluter pays principle, etc.). However, an area where nuclear law still has some ways to go, whereas environmental law excels, is in promoting values of transparency and public participation in activities where the decision-making process has long been left to the “experts”. This is an important challenge, especially at a time when industries and governments speak of nuclear renaissance.

The international trade law framework does not grant a specific status to water. However, recent trends lead towards subjecting water to international trade rules. In order to address this issue, it is necessary to draw attention to several legal, economic or non-economic categories which are used to qualify water under international law. State practice with respect to bulk water removals deserves to be specifically addressed since, in the context of such projects, water may be considered by States as a “good.” If so, then the World Trade Organisation (WTO) multilateral trade agreements, namely the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), which cover trade in goods and services, respectively, would then be applicable. In this article, we will examine the limits imposed by these two treaties with respect to the management of water. The analysis of the relationship between the WTO and water must take into account the particular nature of water resources. States recognise several aspects to water, such as its social, environmental, cultural and economic aspects. Such recognition has an impact on how this resource is addressed within the context of the WTO. Even once positioned within the context of the multilateral trade system, the various facets of this resource, which go beyond its purely economic ones, must be taken into account given the parameters of the GATT and GATS.