Judicial Doctrine of Courts of Latin America about the Quid Pro Quo Principle as the Basis and Limit of the Jurisdiction Immunities of the International Organizations

Revista de la Facultad de Derecho

View Publication Info
 
 
Field Value
 
Title Judicial Doctrine of Courts of Latin America about the Quid Pro Quo Principle as the Basis and Limit of the Jurisdiction Immunities of the International Organizations
Doctrina jurisprudencial de tribunales de América Latina acerca del principio quid pro quo como fundamento y límite de las inmunidades de jurisdicción de las organizaciones internacionales
Doutrina judicial dos tribunais da América Latina sobre o princípio quid pro quo como base e limite das imunidades de jurisdição das organizações internacionais
 
Creator Patrício Masbernat
Gloria Ramos-Fuentes
 
Description The purpose of this article is to address an aspect within the specific field of the legal regime that disciplines the immunities of jurisdiction of international organizations, which is different from others such as those of the immunities of States and diplomatic agents. The majority theories in this matter are absolute, relative and functional. Currently, some very prominent authors have defended another, which we could call “quid pro quo”, and which has been expressed by some national and international courts. This work, in addition to synthesizing very briefly the doctrinal position, seeks to expose the main judicial decisions that have defended this theory in Latin America.
El presente artículo tiene por objeto abordar un aspecto dentro del campo específico del régimen jurídico que disciplina las inmunidades de jurisdicción de las organizaciones internacionales, diferente a otros regímenes de inmunidades de jurisdicción que rigen en Derecho Internacional. Las teorías mayoritarias en esta materia son la absoluta, la relativa y la funcional. Actualmente, algunos autores muy destacados han defendido otra tesis, que podríamos denominar como “quid pro quo”, y que ha sido manifestada por algunos tribunales nacionales e internacionales. Este trabajo, luego de sintetizar muy brevemente la postura doctrinaria, busca exponer las principales decisiones judiciales que han defendido esta tesis en América Latina.
O objetivo deste artigo é abordar um aspecto dentro do campo específico do regime jurídico que disciplina as imunidades de jurisdição de organizações internacionais, diferente de outros, como os das imunidades de Estados e agentes diplomáticos. As teorias majoritárias nesse assunto são absolutas, relativas e funcionais. Atualmente, alguns autores muito importantes defenderam outro, que poderíamos chamar de “quid pro quo”, e que foi expresso por alguns tribunais nacionais e internacionais. Este trabalho, além de sintetizar brevemente a posição doutrinária, procura expor as principais decisões judiciais que defenderam essa tese na América Latina.
 
Publisher Facultad de Derecho
 
Date 2021-01-02
 
Type info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
artículo evaluado por pares
Peer-reviewed Article
Avaliado pelos pares
 
Format application/pdf
text/html
 
Identifier https://revista.fder.edu.uy/index.php/rfd/article/view/816
10.22187/rfd2021n50a17
 
Source Revista de la Facultad de Derecho; Núm. 50 (2021); e20215017
Revista de la Facultad de Derecho; No 50 (2021); e20215017
Revista de la Facultad de Derecho; n. 50 (2021); e20215017
2301-0665
0797-8316
 
Language spa
 
Relation https://revista.fder.edu.uy/index.php/rfd/article/view/816/1449
https://revista.fder.edu.uy/index.php/rfd/article/view/816/1450
/*ref*/Araújo, F. (2016). A imunidade de jurisdição das organizações internacionais face ao direito de acesso à justiça. Revista de Direito Internacional, 13(3), 391-404.
/*ref*/Azaria, D. (2015). Exception of Non-Performance. Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law. Oxford Public International Law.
/*ref*/Berenson, W. (2013). Inmunidad de jurisdicción de organizaciones internacionales públicas en el sistema interamericano: desarrollos y preocupaciones. http://www.oas.org/es/sla/ddi/docs/publicaciones_digital_XL_curso_derecho_internacional_2013_William_M_Berenson.pdf
/*ref*/Bidart Campos, G. (S/D a). El derecho a la jurisdicción y la jurisdicción internacional. Revista Juridica El Derecho, ED, 15-953
/*ref*/Bidart Campos, G. (S/D b). Inmunidad total de jurisdicción de entes internacionales y privación de justicia en sede interna e internacional -Derecho constitucional y jus congens-. La Ley, t. 91, 194-200.
/*ref*/Black, H. C. (1968). Black’s Law Dictionary, Thomson West, USA, 4.ª ed.
/*ref*/Blokker, N. (2013). International Organizations: the Untouchables? International Organizations Law Review 10, 259-275.
/*ref*/Cardoso, T, (2015). Entre as imunidades e a responsabilidade das organizações internacionais: possíveis contornos para uma efetiva reparação. Revista Brasileira de Direito Internacional, 5(1), 51-85. 2015.
/*ref*/Castro, F. & Hucbner, T. (2013). Imunidade absoluta de jurisdição dos organismos internacionais e a violação aos direitos humanos (trabalhistas): comentários à oj 416 do TST. Revista Meritum, Belo Horizonte, 8(1), 99-141.
/*ref*/Di Filippo, M. (2014). Immunity From Suit Of International Organisations Versus Individual Right Of Access To Justice: An Overview Of Recent Domestic And International Case Law”, en Daniel Pavón (Dir.), Derecho Internacional De Los Derechos Humanos: Manifestaciones, Violaciones y Respuestas Actuales, Tomo I Especial referencia al ámbito universal, EDUCC - Editorial de la Universidad Católica de Córdoba, Argentina, 2014, 203-246.
/*ref*/Drnas, Z. & Sartori, M. (2010). La aplicación del Derecho Internacional en los fallos de la Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación Argentina. Fuentes Normativas, Subjetividad Internacional, Órganos de Representación, Inmunidad de Jurisdicción y Ejecución I, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Argentina.
/*ref*/Freedman, R. (2014). UN Immunity or Impunity? A Human Rights Based Challenge. The European Journal of International Law. V. 25(1), 239–254. Garner, B.A. (2004), Black’s Law Dictionary, Thomson West, USA, 8ª ed.
/*ref*/Kryvoi, Y. (2016). Procedural Fairness as a Precondition for Immunity of International Organizations. International Organizations Law Review, 13(2). Nanda, V. P. (2005). Accountability of international organizations: some Observations. Denver Journal of International Law and Policy, 33(3)
/*ref*/Novak, G. & Reinisch, A. (2012). Chapter Fifteen, Desirable Standards For The Design Of Administrative Tribunals From The Perspective Of Domestic Courts”, The Development and Effectiveness of International Administrative Law. On the Occasion of the Thirtieth Anniversary of the World Bank Administrative Tribunal, Edited by Olufemi Elias, Martinus Nijhofff Publishers, Leiden, 2012, 273-302.
/*ref*/Nollkaemper, A. (2011). National courts and the international rule of law.
/*ref*/Oesch, M. (2014). Commercial Treaties. Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law. Oxford Public International Law. Article last updated: April 2014. Version de Base de Datos.
/*ref*/Reinisch, A. (2009). Convención sobre Prerrogativas e Inmunidades de las Naciones Unidas. Convención sobre Prerrogativas e Inmunidades de los Organismos Especializados. United Nations Audiovisual Library of International Law. [https://legal.un.org/avl/pdf/ha/cpiun-cpisa/cpiun-cpisa_s.pdf].
/*ref*/Reinisch, A. (2013).To What Extent Can and Should National Courts ‘Fill the Accountability Gap’. International Organizations Law Review, 10, 573- 587.
/*ref*/Ruys, T. et all. (2019). The Cambridge Handbook of Immunities and International Law.
/*ref*/Ryngaert, C. (2010). The Immunity of International Organizations Before Domestic Courts: Recent trends. International Organizations Law Review, 7(1), 121–148, 2010.
/*ref*/Schmitt, P. (2017). 5. National jurisdictions and the immunities of international organizations. en, Access to Justice and International Organizations. The Case of Individual Victims of Human Rights Violations, Leuven Global Governance series.
/*ref*/Simma, B. (2008) “Reciprocity”, Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law. Oxford Public International Law. Version de Base de Datos.
/*ref*/Steinbruck, M. (2014). El desarrollo de las inmunidades de las organizaciones internacionales a través de las contestaciones nacionales. Revista de Postgrado en Derecho de la UNAM, (1), 205-256.
/*ref*/Tzanakopoulos, A. & Tams, C. J. (2013). Domestic Courts as Agents of Development of International Law. Leiden Journal of International Law, (26), 531-540, 2013; Oxford Legal Studies Research Paper N.º 46/2013. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2243193.
/*ref*/Reinisch, A. (2013). To What Extent Can and Should National Courts Fill the Accountability Gap? in Immunity of International Organizations, y en International Organizations Law Review (10), 572-587.
/*ref*/Seidl-Hohenveldern, Ignaz. (1965). The Legal Personality of International and Supranational Organizations. Revue Egyptienne De Droit International, 21, 35-48.
/*ref*/Suy, E. & Angelet, N. (2007). Promise. Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law. Oxford Public International Law. Version de Base de Datos.
/*ref*/Vinuesa, R. (1982). La inmunidad de jurisdicción de las organizaciones internacionales, Rev. LA LEY, 1982-C, 668.
/*ref*/Webb, P. (2016). The Immunity of States, Diplomats and International Organizations in Employment Disputes: The New Human Rights Dilemma? The European Journal of International Law, 27(3), 745–767.
/*ref*/Willis, H. (1924). What Is Consideration in the Anglo-American Law of Contracts? A Historical Summary", en University of Pennsylvania Law Review and American Law Register, 72(3) (Mar., 1924), 245-262.
 
Rights https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
 

Contact Us

The PKP Index is an initiative of the Public Knowledge Project.

For PKP Publishing Services please use the PKP|PS contact form.

For support with PKP software we encourage users to consult our wiki for documentation and search our support forums.

For any other correspondence feel free to contact us using the PKP contact form.

Find Us

Twitter

Copyright © 2015-2018 Simon Fraser University Library