Примеры использования Rules of attribution на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
Article 15 contained two positive rules of attribution concerning insurrectional movements.
Special rules of attribution, so that actions of member States' organs can be attributed to the organization;
To the extent that they do commit the federation, the ordinary rules of attribution stated in article 5 should apply.
The rules of attribution can only be found in general international law which supplements the bilateral investment treaty in this respect.
This would have the advantage of allowing the three major rules of attribution in articles 5, 7 and 8 to be presented without interruption.
Whether a certain conduct amounts to a relevant subsequent treaty practice by a State depends, inter alia,on the applicable rules of attribution.
Thus the rules of attribution play a key role in distinguishing the“State sector” from the“non-State sector” for the purposes of responsibility.
Only a limited number of liability provisions in disaster relief assistance instruments allow for additional rules of attribution such as those found under general international law.
The second specific question relates to the rules of attribution by which the IMF might be held responsible for the wrongful acts of officials, agents or other persons acting on its behalf.
To show that conduct is attributable to the State says nothing, as such, about the legality orotherwise of that conduct, and rules of attribution should not be formulated in terms which imply otherwise.
The rules of attribution set out in the articles on State responsibility might be helpful in identifying the officials or other persons who acted on behalf of a State in an official capacity.
This submission is confirmed by articles 4 and 5 of the International Law Commission draft articles on the responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts,providing for rules of attribution of certain acts to States.
The pertinent rules of attribution for the present purpose of treaty interpretation must therefore be derived from the specific character of the interpretation and the application of treaties by their parties.
In short, not only is article 11 not a rule of attribution, it does not have the slightest impact, even in terms of the burden or proof,on the application of the other provisions of chapter II which are rules of attribution.
This requires special rules of attribution and responsibility in cases where European Union member States are in fact only implementing a binding rule of the international organization.
Thus a particulartreaty might impose obligations on a State but define the"State" for that purpose in a way which produced different consequences than would otherwise flow from the rules of attribution in Chapter II of Part 1.
According to another view, the rules of attribution for State responsibility seemed to be of limited value as such rules were intended to serve a purpose that was conceivably different from that of immunity.
The arbitral tribunal in the Sergei Paushok et al. v. The Government of Mongolia casereferred to articles 4, 5 and 9 as constituting"international law rules of attribution" applicable to the dispute"which are generally considered as representing current customary international law.
But for essentially the same reasons as for article 11, article 12 adds little or nothing as a statement of the law of attribution, It is significant that the two precedents for article 12 cited in the commentary(para. 8)are both primary rules, not rules of attribution.
We do not have in place any rules of attribution under which the WTO may be held responsible for the wrongful conduct of its officials, agents or other persons acting on its behalf, regardless of the source of the violated rule. .
In its report in the United States-- Definitive Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Products from China case,the Appellate Body considered whether the rules of attribution contained in the State responsibility articles are"relevant rules of international law applicable in the relations between the parties.
Concerning the rules of attribution of wrongful conduct, WHO does not have explicit rules specifically concerning the attribution to the Organization of conduct by statutory or other organs, or by officials or experts acting on behalf of the Organization.
For example, in the case of a rule whose main aim is the punishment of the guilty(i.e. in the context of criminal responsibility properly so-called),one would expect different and stricter rules of attribution than in the case of rules of delictual or civil responsibility whose main aim is cessation, restitution and reparation.
One of its concerns was the need to allow for special rules of attribution and responsibility in cases where the member State was merely implementing a binding rule of the international organization.
Whether the rules of attribution in Part One, chapter 2, deal adequately with such matters as the role of internal law in determining the status of an"organ" of the State for the purposes of article 5, and the position of privatized entities exercising governmental functions(draft article 7(b));
It should be stressed, however, that the rules of attribution in the law of state responsibility have a limited function, and are without prejudice to questions of the validity and novation of contracts under their proper law, or to any question of State succession. Questions of State succession may be raised by the International Court's reservation with respect to the routine administrative acts of South Africa in the Namibia Opinion ICJ Reports 1971, p. 16 at para. 125.
That illustrated the limitations of"effective control" as a universal rule of attribution.
Article 5 specifies what might be called the“primary” rule of attribution.
That article was not so much a rule of attribution as an explanation of the scope of the term"organ" in article 5.