Science and the Precautionary Principle in International Courts and Tribunals: Expert Evidence, Burden of Proof and Finality

Half-title......Page 3
Title......Page 5
Copyright......Page 6
Dedication......Page 7
Contents......Page 9
Preface......Page 15
Acknowledgements......Page 23
Part I: Context and theory......Page 27
International adjudication......Page 29
The rationalist tradition......Page 31
Proceduralisation and harmonisation in international law......Page 32
The nature of scientific knowledge......Page 36
The admissibility of scientific evidence......Page 38
The standard of review......Page 40
The precautionary principle......Page 44
Directions for procedural development in international scientific disputes......Page 47
Conclusion......Page 55
The importance of co-operation between disputing parties......Page 58
Case concerning Land Reclamation (Malaysia v. Singapore)......Page 62
Case concerning the Gabcíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia)......Page 63
Southern Bluefin Tuna case (Australia and New Zealand v. Japan)......Page 67
The MOX Plant cases (Ireland v. United Kingdom)......Page 70
Case concerning Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay)......Page 75
Nuclear Tests cases (Australia v. France) (New Zealand v. France)......Page 80
European Communities – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos-Containing Products......Page 86
European Communities – Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones)......Page 89
European Communities – Approval and Marketing of Biotech Products......Page 94
Conclusion......Page 99
Part II: Expert evidence......Page 101
3 Methods for taking expert evidence in scientific disputes......Page 103
Scientific evidence from the parties......Page 106
Advocates presenting the science......Page 114
Evidence generated by administrative procedures......Page 120
The party-appointed independent expert......Page 123
Cross-examination......Page 126
Consultation of international organisations......Page 128
Site visits......Page 132
The court-appointed expert......Page 134
The WTO system for expert evidence......Page 140
Expert witness-conferencing in international arbitration......Page 149
Expert adjudicators and assessors......Page 151
Determination by a neutral expert......Page 155
Conclusion......Page 157
4 The role of adjudicators and the role of experts......Page 162
Mixed questions of fact and law......Page 163
Experts and the burden of proof......Page 174
Precaution in the views of experts......Page 179
Two-stage adjudicatory procedures......Page 184
The Expert Review Group in the World Trade Organization......Page 191
Selection of experts by international courts and tribunals......Page 197
The limits of scientific expertise......Page 201
The quality of scientific evidence......Page 204
The responsibility of the court or tribunal......Page 206
Conclusion......Page 207
Part III: Burden of proof......Page 209
5 Getting to the heart of the rules on burden of proof......Page 211
Principles underlying the rules on the burden of proof......Page 215
Legal sources of the rule on the allocation of the burden of proof......Page 219
Judicial articulation of the rule on burden of proof......Page 224
Distinctions between general rules and exceptions......Page 235
(a) The struggle within WTO dispute settlement......Page 240
(b) Segmentation of legal claims......Page 247
Standards of proof......Page 249
The prima facie case approach and the weighing of the evidence......Page 255
Presumptions......Page 260
Conclusion......Page 265
6 Reversing the burden of proof to give effect to the precautionary principle......Page 266
The precautionary principle......Page 267
‘Administrative’ and ‘adjudicative’ burdens of proof......Page 271
The inherent powers of international courts and tribunals......Page 275
The threshold for the reversal of the burden of proof......Page 280
Judicial interest in the reversal of the burden of proof......Page 284
(a) Cases that proceed to the merits......Page 287
(b) Provisional measures requests......Page 292
Technical methods for reversing the burden of proof......Page 298
Conclusion......Page 302
Part IV: The finality of adjudication......Page 305
7 Finality, revision and nullity in scientific cases......Page 307
The principle of finality......Page 311
Revision......Page 315
(a) Discovery of a fact......Page 320
(b) That the fact be unknown......Page 322
(c) That the fact be a pre-existing one......Page 323
(d) That the fact be relevant......Page 325
(e) That the fact be of such a nature as to be a decisive factor......Page 326
(f) Procedural considerations......Page 327
(g) Assessing the utility of revision in scientific cases......Page 329
Nullity......Page 330
(a) The process for determining nullity under the ICSID Convention......Page 331
(b) Bases of nullity in international arbitration and adjudication more generally......Page 333
(c) The possibility of developing new processes for determining nullity beyond the ICSID system......Page 339
(d) Procedural considerations......Page 341
(e) Assessing the utility of the doctrine of nullity in scientific cases......Page 342
Conclusion......Page 343
8 Reassessment proceedings and res judicata......Page 344
‘Reassessment’ proceedings......Page 345
(a) Preliminary proceedings......Page 346
(b) The WTO approach......Page 347
(c) The Continued Suspension of Obligations cases......Page 348
(d) Allocation of the burden of proof in the proposed reassessment proceedings......Page 351
Challenges to countermeasures......Page 356
(a) The Continued Suspension of Obligations cases and Article 22.8 of the DSU......Page 357
Res judicata in subsequent proceedings......Page 360
Conclusion......Page 365
9 Conclusion......Page 367
Bibliography......Page 375
Index......Page 391