The browser you are using is not supported by this website. All versions of Internet Explorer are no longer supported, either by us or Microsoft (read more here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/windows/end-of-ie-support).

Please use a modern browser to fully experience our website, such as the newest versions of Edge, Chrome, Firefox or Safari etc.

State Responsibility and the Primary-Secondary Rules Terminology: : The Role of Language for an Understanding of the International Legal System

På svenska

Author

Summary, in English

In the international legal literature, it is commonplace to talk about the law of state responsibility as secondary rules of law. The terminology emphasises that in some way or another the law of state responsibility is different from other rules of the international legal system – what international legal scholars refer to as primary rules of law. The present essay inquires into the soundness of this language. As argued, the primary-secondary rules terminology builds on two assumptions. First, it assumes that the law of state responsibility can be described as separate from the ordinary (or primary) rules of international law. Secondly, it assumes that the two classes of rules can be described as pertaining to different stages of the judicial decision-making process. As shown in this essay, neither assumption can be defended as correct.

Publishing year

2009

Language

English

Pages

53-72

Publication/Series

Nordic Journal of International Law

Volume

78

Document type

Journal article

Publisher

Brill

Topic

  • Law

Keywords

  • Public international law
  • Folkrätt

Status

Published

Research group

  • Public International Law

ISBN/ISSN/Other

  • ISSN: 0902-7351