International Court of Justice Defines Maritime Boundary Between Peru and Chile
Introduction

Introduction
On November 25, 2013, a panel established under the dispute settlement system of the World Trade Organization (WTO) issued its report in the EC – Seal Products dispute.[1] The decision arose from complaints by Canada and Norway against a legislative scheme adopted by the European Union (EU) in 2009 to prohibit the importation and marketing of seal products (the EU Seal Regime).[2] On January 24, 2014, Canada and Norway filed to appeal the panel's decision; the
Introduction
The normative and policy-setting functions of the World Health Organization (âWHOâ) have been substantially influenced by the differences of opinion within WHOâs membership about the impact of trade and intellectual property (âIPâ) rules on public health. In particular, WHO members differ as to the organizationâs role in addressing the perceived failure of the pharmaceutical market to generate safe and affordable medicines for diseases predominantly affecting developing countries.
Introduction
Acknowledging the global and complex nature of shipping activities, the Kyoto Protocol, Article 2(2) entrusts the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from marine bunker fuels to the International Maritime Organization (IMO).[i] Since 1997, the IMO Marine Environmental Protection Committee (MEPC) has been actively engaged in discussions concerning the reduction of GHG emissions from ships and the elaboration of a legal framework for energy efficiency in the shipping industry as a means of tackling climate change.
Critics of the World Trade Organization (WTO) fear that WTO rules can be used to challenge regulatory actions intended to protect the environment, bolster food safety, or promote public health.[1] These fears were brought to the fore by three recent cases concerning the WTO's Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement).[2] In those cases, the United States was found to have violated the non-discrimination obligation in Article 2.1 of the TBT Agreement, and in
Introduction
Introduction
The increasing conviction that the government of Bashar al-Assad in Syria has used chemical weapons in an attack with many civilian casualties raises the question: what military response may the outside world legally take without the authority of the UN Security Council?
Introduction
Introduction