The Curious Case of Qatar v. Bahrain in the International Court of Justice

The Role of International Organisations in the Development of International Law: An Analytical Assessment of the United Nations

“…91 According to Alvarez, the most substantial body of emerging "soft law" consists of a growing volume of rulings rendered by permanent international courts and tribunals. 92 The UNSC, for example, has established interim criminal tribunals such as: the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) 93 and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) 94 to prosecute those involved in war crimes and serious violations of international humanitarian law. The UN has also collaborated with the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL), the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC), and others, such as regional human rights courts and the International Criminal Court (ICC) employing diverse approaches and strategies.…”

Professional Ethics at the International Bar

“…A barrister must refuse instructions if he were to be "professionally embarrassed" by: 1) insufficient experience or expertise; 2) inadequate preparation time; 3) fettering, unlawful or unethical instructions; 4) prejudice to justice or to an unrepresented party; 5) conflict-of-interest; or 6) breach of confidentiality. 148 He may refuse instructions which: 1) require him to work outside of his ordinary working year; 2) offer an "improper" fee; 3) require a conditional fee agreement; 4) are directly from a lay client; or 5) come from a unified professional and lay client. 149 Like other European jurisdictions, contingency fee agreements are generally illegal.…”

“…518 That these documents, which contained several obvious anomalies, 519 were submitted without detecting by Qatar"s external counsel 520 appears not to be collusion but rather a failure to verify. 521 In ethical question is the standard of "reasonable knowledge" 522 expected of counsel in a duty not to mislead the court. This would accord with the standard of diligence owed to clients to require counsel to take reasonable steps to confirm the authenticity of documents.…”