International law entails principles and rules that govern relations among countries, individuals, and organisations. It also has public international law that deals specifically with rights among different states and various citizens of different states. On the other hand, private international law looks at disputes among private individuals, natural or juridical, which occur among parties of different nations. In some cases, the line between public and private international laws has become unclear. Australia operates under the federal system of laws. This makes its relation to international law a complex affair. Enforcement of international law in Australia has met challenges. However, we must understand that enforcement alone does not determine the extent of what the term law means. This is because, in some cases, domestic laws may also be unenforceable. In the recent case of Jenton Overseas Investment Pte Ltd v Townsing [2008] VSC 470 (11 November 2008), the Supreme Court of Victoria offered an essential observation of how the uses Foreign Judgement Act 1991 may affect enforcement of international law. 1 The Judge turned down an application from a foreign country (Singapore). He observed that Australian courts are reluctant to invoke public policy as an avenue for refusing enforcement or recognition of foreign judgement. Australian courts have not recognised or enforced foreign judgement on this basis. The main reason is the “interest of comity’ to maintain” (mutual respect among sovereign states) (Foreign Judgment Act 1991). This happens when courts observe the Foreign Judgment Act. In this regard, enforcement and registration are only relevant on the grounds that are ‘significant reciprocity of treatment’ of Australian judgement in a foreign country. The courts also observe this because of public policy volatility. In this sense, a repugnant law may exist or repugnant applications of such laws may occur; thus, offending public policy. However, such cases only occur in crucial cases where there are offenses of laws of Australia public policy. Despite such challenges, Australia wants to enhance enforcement of international law. This is an attempt to understand various laws from different nations, legal procedures, and institutions in areas of international laws. Australia planned to enhance this approach through establishing institutions, training, and legal exchanges. In the international front, Australia has signed several treaties relating to international law on areas of social security, trade, shipping, security, non-proliferation, and defence among others. These treaties form the basis of international law. However, the country experiences challenges in enforcing such laws due to its federal system. The federal system provides an opportunity for opposing parties to opt for arbitral laws instead of relying on Model Law based on the International Commercial Arbitration of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL). This is a significant source of challenge to application of international law in Australia where various laws of different nations interact. Another source of a challenge lies in the appeal or review powers of different states with regard to Commercial Arbitr