13) Regional and local customary law

Regional customary international law - Customary international law that arises from state practice and opinio juris of a discrete and limited number of states; as it departs from generally applicable customary international law, it is only binding upon and opposable against those states participating in its formation;

Local customary international law - Customary international law that arises from state practice and opinio juris of a discrete and limited number of states; as it departs from generally applicable customary international law, it is only binding upon and opposable against those states participating in its formation.

In ICJ: http://books.google.ru/books?id=1ouc3khTuQcC&pg=PA71&lpg=PA71&dq=Regional+and+local+customary+law+icj&source=bl&ots=9FeXS2foZs&sig=Lx6jDnFsv0ErB08tQx8dZqPZ4Ro&hl=ru&sa=X&ei=5MQiT4ClAaP64QThyKGXCA&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Regional%20and%20local%20customary%20law%20icj&f=false

http://books.google.ru/books?id=jrTsNTzcY7EC&pg=PA206&lpg=PA206&dq=Regional+and+local+customary+law&source=bl&ots=_m_9xN4AKg&sig=f2IlbDwKpWDDfTHgDGAXInFzI4g&hl=ru&sa=X&ei=dsQiT9WwAuKL4gSg4O3NCA&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=Regional%20and%20local%20customary%20law&f=false

14) What are obligations erga omnes? Erga omnes and jus cogens.

erga omnes rights or obligations are owed toward all. Examples: In his opinion of 9 juli 2004 the International Court of Justice found "the right of peoples to self-determination" a right erga omnes[Legal consequences of the construction of a wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territories]. - http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/pdfid/414ad9a719.pdf

Like obligations erga omnes, norms of jus cogens protect the common interests of states and basic moral values. In addition, the classic examples of norms of jus cogens that emerged during the codification of the law of treaties (which led to the adoption of Article 53 of the Vienna Convention) largely coincide with the examples of obligations erga omnes given by the International Court, and some characteristic expressions attaching to jus cogens (such the international community ‘as a whole’) occur also in the dictum on obligations erga omnes. There are also differences, though, starting from the ‘value-oriented’ approach adopted by the International Court as opposed to the ‘test-oriented’ approach reflected in Article 53 of the Vienna Convention on the law of treaties. This chapter examines the concept of jus cogens, with particular regard to the controversial issue whether norms of jus cogens allow for persistent objectors.

+ http://www.law.duke.edu/journals/cite.php?59+Law+&+Contemp.+Probs.+63+(Fall+1996)+pdf

A peremptory norm (also called jus cogens) is a fundamental principle of international law which is accepted by the international community of states as a norm from which no derogation is ever permitted.

15) What are general principles of law as enunciated in Article 38(1)(c)?

Fortunately for the international judge or the domestic judge faced with applying international law in a particular cause, the answer can be found in Article 38(1) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. This provision specifically authorizes in listing the sources of law to be applied by the Court, treaties, customs and “the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations.” Professor Janis comments on this provision:

The basic notion is that a general principle of international law is some proposition of law so fundamental that it will be found in virtually every legal system. When treaties and customary international law fail to offer a needed international rule, a search may be launched in comparative law to discover if national legal systems use a common legal principle. If such a common legal principle is found, then it is presumed that a comparable principle should be attributed to fill the gap in international law.

An example cited among others by Professor Janis is the International Court of Justice decision in 1949 in the Corfu Channel case, which addressed the question of Albanian civil liability for the mining of the Corfu Channel and subsequent damage to two British naval vessels that resulted from striking mines. In discussing whether the United Kingdom could establish the knowledge and responsibility of Albania for the laying of the mines, the Court’s opinion stated:

[T[he fact of this exclusive territorial control exercised by a State within its frontiers has a bearing upon the methods of proof available to establish the knowledge of that State as to such events. By reason of this exclusive control, the other State, the victim of a breach of international law, is often unable to furnish direct proof of facts giving rise to responsibility. Such a State should be allowed a more liberal recourse to inferences of fact and circumstantial evidence. This indirect evidence is admitted in all systems of law, and its use is recognized by international decisions. It must be regarded as of special weight when it is based on a series of facts linked together and leading logically to a single conclusion. (Emphasis added)

The existence of a body of legal principles and rules that are common to all, or almost all legal systems, is supported by some observations made by a British barrister, C. Wilfred Jenks, in his book The Common Law of Mankind, published under the auspices of the London Institute of World Affairs in 1958. In a section of the book titled “Extent of the Influence of the Common and the Civil Law,” Jenks observes that virtually all of the legal systems of the world, including those in Latin America, Islamic countries, African countries, countries within the former Soviet block, India, China, and Japan have been profoundly influenced in the course of their development by either the civil law or the common law. The result is that many principles of law are common to these legal systems. One only has to examine, for example, the law of contracts or torts or the criminal law relating to murder in these legal systems to understand the truth of this assertion. Thus the common law and the civil law, which by themselves share common principles of law, provide the basic framework that many general principles of law can be derived and used to “fill the gap” when there is no general principle of international law available for application in the resolution of a particular case.

http://www.judicialmonitor.org/archive_0707/generalprinciples.html

16) What is non liquet?

a non liquet is a situation where there is no applicable law. Non liquet translates into English from Latin as "it is not clear."

ICJ: Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons case “…..But at paragraph 96 of its Opinion, and in paragraph 2E of its dispositif, the Court effectively pronounces a non liquet on the key issue on the grounds of uncertainty in the present state of the law, and of facts…..” - http://www.derechos.org/nizkor/peace/icjopinion/higgins.html

+http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Court_of_Justice_advisory_opinion_on_the_Legality_of_the_Threat_or_Use_of_Nuclear_Weapons

17) Principles of estoppel and acquiescence

http://books.google.ru/books?id=0-TSdvAg2IgC&pg=PA103&lpg=PA103&dq=Principles+of+estoppel+and+acquiescence&source=bl&ots=73LU1a2PR4&sig=xoU7OwKMlj9duURp_5o77RAUQ1Q&hl=ru&sa=X&ei=bNQiT9XlJ6Tg4QTbwairCA&ved=0CGYQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=Principles%20of%20estoppel%20and%20acquiescence&f=false – стр. 103-104

http://books.google.ru/books?id=wmq5xQN8_S0C&pg=PA104&lpg=PA104&dq=Principles+of+estoppel+and+acquiescence&source=bl&ots=iyoWuJ2HPP&sig=Btnfzm7i6iXclVhqNqnnoxb3rq0&hl=ru&sa=X&ei=bNQiT9XlJ6Tg4QTbwairCA&ved=0CHwQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=Principles%20of%20estoppel%20and%20acquiescence&f=false – стр. 104

+ Case Concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v Thailand) (Merits) [1962] ICJ Reports 6 at 32-3.