bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
Members of Visiting Forces
Authors: Hartov Mette Prassé 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter provides a proposed scope of application of the NATO SOFA and compares this to other agreements. In the NATO SOFA, the definition of a ‘force’ covers both collective military units and individuals in active service and assigned to the military line of command. Nationality is not a condition to be met as a ‘member of a force’. The member of the armed service of one party must be present on the territory of another contracting party to fall within the definition, and as such, Receiving State personnel are excluded from the definition of a ‘force’. The force must furthermore be operating in the North Atlantic Treaty area. Finally, the member of the force must be present on the territory of another party in connection with official duties. This condition, particularly, has generated discussion in NATO SOFA practice.
Civilian Components
Authors: Muñoz Mosquera Andrés B , Chalanouli Nikoleta 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter addresses the civilian components accompanying Visiting Forces. For these components, the privileges and immunities of the UN and those specific of the mission apply. This mission immunity is essential for an impartial and effective performance of the specific UN mandate, which is ‘a prerequisite for the success of the mission’. The legal framework for these privileges and immunities has to be sought in Art. 105 of the UN Charter, which consecrates the principle that the UN officials shall enjoy in the territory of each of its members such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the fulfilment of UN purposes in order to be independent in the exercise of their functions. On the other hand, the 1946 Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations has not come to bring a common understanding on to whom it applies when peacekeepers are involved.
Contractor Personnel
Authors: Voetelink Joop 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter explores the rights and obligations of contractors under contemporary status-of-forces agreement (SOFA) provisions with a particular emphasis on criminal jurisdiction. Initially, it describes the origin of civilian involvement in military operations and discusses it from a historical perspective. The focus then turns to present day practice. First, the term contractor is explained and defined. Next, the post-Cold War practice with respect to the legal status of contractors and their employees is explored by taking the example of SOFAs concluded by States and organizations that are in particular involved in contractor support of deployed operations, i.e. the US and NATO, UN, and EU. The chapter then analyses current SOFA practice by comparing the position of contractors and troops under international law.
Entry and Departure of Visiting Forces
Authors: Fleck Dieter 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter details the arrangements typically made for the entry and departure of foreign military personnel. Entry and departure provisions in the UN Model SOFA and the NATO SOFA are very similar. The prerequisite for lawfully entering into and departing from a foreign State is the prior permission by its government. While such permission is generally included in a visa, specific regulations have been developed to facilitate the procedure, ranging from the verbal permission given by a border guard at the point of entry to standard permission for the nationals of certain countries to enter the territory of others. More specific arrangements have been made for foreign armed forces to regulate the entry of their personnel into the participating State.
Travel and Transport
Authors: Black-Branch Jonathan L 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter looks at the duties and rights concerning freedom of movement. The successful implementation of any UN or NATO mission is largely dependent on the ability to travel and make use of transport or what may be referred to as mobility rights and free movement. The ability to travel as freely and easily as possible invariably assists in accomplishing the mandate. As basic as this may sound, the movement of Visiting Forces within a Host State has raised a number of problems and remains a contentious issue. This is due in part because of the potential causing damage to the environment as well as Visiting Forces becoming involved in conflicts with local residents. Indeed, the circumstances that Visiting Forces face today have changed drastically since World War II.
Arms
Authors: Nijhof Jarin 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter turns to the right to carry arms. The matter of whether foreign forces can carry weapons in the execution of their duties touches upon the core of State sovereignty. Governments have the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within their territory. On the other hand, the right to carry arms is essential to armed forces in order to successfully execute their mission. While the Receiving State can be deemed to have consented to such right when agreeing to a military force on its territory, matters such as the scope of the right to carry arms remain subject to agreement between the States. Force security aspects deserve some discussion as to the responsibilities of the Receiving State and Sending States. Also the legal limitations on the use of force require specific attention, as well as the rules of the Receiving State regarding the importation of arms.
Jurisdiction
Authors: Conderman Paul J , Sari Aurel 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter concerns the exercise of jurisdiction over Visiting Forces. Here, Sending States and Receiving States rely on competing jurisdictional principles, the territorial principle, and that of service jurisdiction, in order to claim the right to exercise their regulatory authority over Visiting Forces. Neither principle can be allowed to triumph over the other without denying a legitimate and vital interest of one of the parties. This is why agreements providing for the exercise of exclusive jurisdiction are rare. The vast majority of status-of-forces agreements (SOFAs) strike some balance between these competing principles and interests, influenced by the political, legal, and operational context of the deployment.
Deceased Members
Authors: Grenfell Katarina 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter deals with situations involving deceased members of a UN peacekeeping operation. Para. 50 of the UN Model SOFA, which continues to be included verbatim in recent mission-specific status-of-forces agreements (SOFAs), establishes the right of the UN to take charge of and dispose of the body of a member of the mission, should they while in service of the peacekeeping operation in the host country. The UN has established procedures as to how this is done in practical terms, including in respect of notifying the next of kin, conducting an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the death, administering benefits and entitlements to dependents as applicable, and ensuring official recognition of service. This provision has not been particularly controversial with Host States. Where questions have arisen they have related to accountability for attacks on UN peacekeepers and the need to collect and store evidence.
The ‘Joint Commission’ Liaison Mechanism
Authors: Timm Donald A 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter discusses a solution for coordination problems developed by the US in conjunction with the individual Sending States in whose territory the US has been invited to send its forces in peacetime. Although each individual case has its differences due to different sovereigns, different times of development, and different sizes or missions of the forces involved, there are nonetheless many conceptual similarities which transcend these differences and which may recommend themselves as a guide. The core similarity is the concept of a single overarching binational body charged with overseeing the implementation of the status-of-forces agreement (SOFA) and facilitating communication and cooperation between the cognizant authorities of the two sovereigns. This chapter discusses the general attributes of the ‘Joint Commission’ liaison mechanism in particular. It explains the purpose of the mechanism, its structure, its operation and authority, and the administration of the Joint Commission structure.
Supplemental Arrangements
Authors: Timm Donald A 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter addresses some of the various types of ‘separate’, or supplemental, arrangements that have been developed under the NATO SOFA. Since 1951, it has become practice among NATO Member States and its new partners to provide for any modifications and supplements of the conditions laid down in the NATO SOFA by legally binding agreements concluded by or on behalf of the participating States rather than by informal instruments. The chapter provides some examples of each and what they are designed to accomplish. In some instances the language which has been used in such agreements are also provided. For the most part, examples are drawn from agreements to which the US is a party, either under the NATO SOFA, other stand-alone status-of-forces agreements (SOFAs), or agreements based on other authority that can be used to implement or supplement the SOFA.
Termination
Authors: Burkhardt Frank 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter discusses the denunciation and termination of status-of-forces agreements (SOFAs). Art. 54 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties requires as a general prerequisite that all signatories of an international treaty have to be informed if one of the signatories wants to withdraw from the treaty. According to Art. XIX (2) NATO SOFA the US government as the Depositary has to be informed about the decision to withdraw and it shall notify such denunciation to all other Parties. According to Art. XIX (3) NATO SOFA the period until a denunciation takes effect is one year.
Applicability during Crisis or War
Authors: Fleck Dieter 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter considers the applicability of treaty law provisions in periods of crisis or war. Such an issue generally cannot be solved by reference to the treaty text itself. In fact, the UN Model SOFA does not address the issue, the general interest here is to conduct peace operations mandated by the Security Council in any event, making full use of relevant status-of-forces agreement (SOFA) provisions as far as possible even in times of tension. The NATO SOFA provides for a double track solution in Art. XV: in the event of ‘hostilities to which the North Atlantic Treaty applies’ NATO SOFA shall remain in force with one single exception related to claims settlement, but its provisions shall be reviewed immediately and they may even be suspended by giving sixty days' notice.
Rights and Obligations of Foreign National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Authors: Spieker Heike 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter describes the origins of National Societies of the Red Cross or the Red Crescent before elaborating on their legal status as well as their mandates, roles, and tasks. Together with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the International Federation, National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies form the three components of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. They have been endowed with a mandate by the international community which is at the same time considerably broad and distinct, entailing specific tasks, roles, rights, and obligations. The scope of their privileges and immunities is limited and largely determined by bilateral agreements between a deploying National Society/Movement component and the Receiving State. The chapter highlights the legal framework of National Societies’ international operations as well as specificities of their relationship with military bodies.
The Law of Stationing Forces in Germany
Authors: Fleck Dieter 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter describes the different phases of legal regulation of the stationing of visiting forces in Germany until today. World War II has led to the stationing of a large number of foreign forces, first as occupiers but soon as allies playing an active role in the maintenance of external security. When occupation was terminated in 1955, there were Soviet forces in the German Democratic Republic and forces from six permanent Sending States in the Federal Republic of Germany. In addition, in both German States further Allies, too, were hosted on a temporary basis. In this context, the chapter assesses both the right to stay in the country (jus ad praesentiam) and the status regulation (jus in praesentia).
Australia
Authors: Paterson Ian 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter discusses the law of set-off and netting in Australia as well as the key restrictions on the availability of set-off under Australian law. In Australia, set-off and netting arrangements are often used as a means of reducing operational and credit risk. In the context of reducing credit risk involving financial rights and obligations (for example, deposits and loans), set-off and netting arrangements depend on one or more of: contract, section 553C of the Corporations Act 2001, and the Payment Systems and Netting Act 1998 (Netting Act). The chapter first considers set-off between solvent parties and set-off against insolvent parties before explaining set-off under section 553C of the Corporations Act. It also examines issues that may arise in cross-border transactions under Australian law with respect to the availability of set-off in section D of the Corporations Act, with emphasis on the choice of law and set-off in insolvency.
Austria
Authors: Tiefenthaler Stefan 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter provides an overview of the law of set-off in Austria. The right of set-off in Austria is governed by general rules found in sections 1438–1443 of the Austrian Civil Code. The Austrian Insolvency Code also outlines restrictions on and extensions of the right of set-off and various modifications to the general rules. The chapter first considers set-off between solvent parties, focusing on contractual set-off, capital maintenance and other restrictions, set-off in the context of legal proceedings, and statutory set-off. It then explains set-off against insolvent parties by discussing the extension of the right of set-off in insolvency, restrictions on the right of set-off in insolvency, exceptions to the general rule on set-off, claims arising by reason of the opening of insolvency proceedings, set-off and prohibition of creditor preferences, and avoidance and fraudulent transfers. Finally, it examines issues arising in cross-border set-off.
Singapore
Authors: Chan Andrew 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter examines the law of set-off in Singapore. In Singapore, set-off may occur both within and outside of individual bankruptcy and insolvent winding-up of companies. There are four types of set-off under Singapore law: equitable set-off, procedural or legal set-off, contractual set-off, and combination set-off. The chapter first provides an overview of these four types of set-off, which fall outside bankruptcy or insolvent winding-up, before discussing set-off within bankruptcy or insolvent winding-up. In particular, it considers the basis and requirements of insolvency set-off, limits to insolvency set-off, and other insolvency regimes that affect set-off. It also analyses cross-border issues relating to applicable law on set-off as well as insolvency proceedings involving a foreign company.
Turkey
Authors: Başgöz Aslı , Akmenek Yalın , Durmaz Bora 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter examines the law of set-off in Turkey, both outside and within the context of bankruptcy. It considers the legal framework of set-off under Turkish law, along with its mechanisms, requirements, limitations, and consequences under the Turkish Code of Obligations, the Turkish Execution and Bankruptcy Law, and contractual arrangements. Under Turkish law, set-off does not provide for the actual performance of an obligation. Rather, it is a mechanism for extinguishing an obligation as if performed in exchange for a counterclaim. The chapter first considers the requirements for set-off between solvent parties, the consequences of set-off outside bankruptcy, and contractual set-off. It then discusses the legal framework for set-off against insolvent parties as well as the restrictions and objections to set-off. It also analyses conflict of laws issues arising in cross-border set-off.
A Guide to the SIAC Arbitration Rules
Authors: Choong John , Mangan Mark , Lingard Nicholas 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This is the first book to provide a comprehensive rule-by-rule commentary of the inception, interpretation, and application of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) Rules. The book provides useful guidance for practitioners whilst also delivering commentary and thematic analysis to highlight the connections between the SIAC Rules and those of other institutions. It begins with an introduction to Singapore arbitration, both practical and legal, and is followed by an overview of SIAC arbitration, including the different stages of a typical case and the corporate structure of SIAC. Every rule is examined in detail on a thematic basis, starting with the commencement of an arbitration and working up to and including the rendering of an award and the determination of costs. This new edition has been fully updated to include the 2016 SIAC Rules, and also contains additional chapters on the new rules on multiple contracts, consolidation, and joinder, the early dismissal of claims and defences, and the SIAC Investment Arbitration Rules (2017). Relevant supporting documents are appended, including SIAC Practice Notes and the SIAC Code of Ethics for Arbitrators. The book is a comprehensive exposition of SIAC arbitration, and is indispensable for any practitioner involved in arbitration in Asia.
Legal Framework for Arbitration in Singapore
Authors: Choong John 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter addresses the legal framework for the conduct of arbitration and the enforcement of awards in Singapore. It begins with a look at the legislative framework for arbitration in Singapore, covering the history of arbitration regulation in Singapore, the scope of the Singapore International Arbitration Act, the Arbitration Act that regulates domestic arbitration in Singapore, and the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes. It then considers the way in which Singapore courts lend their support to, and exercise supervisory powers over, arbitrations seated in Singapore. The chapter concludes with an analysis of the means by which awards can be challenged and enforced in Singapore.
SIAC Corporate Structure
Authors: Choong John 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter discusses the corporate structure of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC). The SIAC administers arbitrations for which it is responsible by appointing arbitrators, managing the financial and practical aspects of cases, carrying out supervisory functions entrusted by the SIAC Rules, and scrutinizing and issuing awards. It performs these roles through the following organs: (a) the board of directors, which is under the supervision of a chairman; (b) the SIAC Court, which is led by a president; (c) the chief executive officer; and (d) the secretariat, which includes the registrar. In addition, the SIAC has three overseas liaison offices which do not administer cases but promote the SIAC as an arbitral institution.
Starting the Arbitration
Authors: Choong John 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter starts by considering which version of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) Rules should apply to an arbitration and the meaning of certain defined terms (Rule 1). The SIAC notice provisions (Rule 2) are addressed in Part B. The matters to be covered by a claimant in a notice of arbitration in order to start an arbitration (Rule 3) are then covered in Part C. Finally, the requirements for a valid response to a notice of arbitration (Rule 4) are explained in Part D. Unless otherwise stated, all references to the SIAC Rules are to the 2016 version of the rules.
Expedited Proceedings
Authors: Choong John 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
One of the criticisms against international arbitration is its occasional failure to live up to its potential for the expeditious resolution of disputes. Indeed, there is a tension at the core of modern international arbitration. On the one hand, parties seek speedy, cost-efficient, and final dispute resolution; while on the other hand, the absence of an appeal mechanism for arbitral awards generates a perceived need for exhaustive analysis of every fact and conceivable argument and for the retention of the ‘best’ (and therefore the busiest) lawyers and arbitrators, creating an attendant risk of ever-longer and more expensive arbitration proceedings. This chapter discusses the SIAC's rules designed to achieve expedition and cost-efficiency in all cases. These include Rule 5.1 on circumstances in which the expedited procedure may be appropriate, and Rule 5.2 covering the SIAC expedited procedure.
Multiple Contracts, Consolidation, Joinder, and Intervention
Authors: Choong John 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter discusses Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) Rules 6 to 8, which deal with complex questions that arise in arbitrations involving multiple contracts and multiple parties. Rule 6 deals with the commencement of arbitration involving multiple contracts. Rule 7 has significantly expanded upon the circumstances under which additional parties may be joined in an SIAC arbitration. An application for joinder may be made either to the SIAC Court, before the constitution of the tribunal (Rules 7.1 to 7.7), or to the tribunal, after it has been formed (Rules 7.8 to 7.11). Rule 8 deals with the consolidation of arbitrations. As in the case of an application for joinder, an application for consolidation may be filed before the tribunal has been constituted (Rules 8.1 to 8.6) or, in more limited terms, after constitution of the tribunal (Rules 8.7 to 8.10).
Formation and Challenge of the Arbitral Tribunal
Authors: Choong John 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
The ability of parties to influence the constitution of their arbitral tribunal is an important manifestation of party autonomy in international arbitration. This chapter first discusses the means by which parties can do so pursuant to Rules 9 to 13. Specifically, Rule 9 covers the number and appointment of arbitrators; Rule 10 provides a default procedure for the nomination and appointment of a sole arbitrator should the parties fail to agree on a candidate; Rule 11 discusses the appointment of arbitrators; Rule 12 covers the multi-party appointment of arbitrator(s); and Rule 13 deals with the qualifications of arbitrators. The chapter then considers the procedures for, and consequences of, a party challenging an appointed arbitrator under Rules 14 to 18.
The Conduct of Proceedings
Authors: Choong John 
Published: July 2018

Abstract
This chapter addresses the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) Rules governing the conduct of proceedings in a SIAC arbitration. It begins by enumerating the general principles (Rule 19) in Part A, followed by specific rules governing: the parties' written submissions (Rule 20) in Part B; the choice of seat (Rule 21) and language (Rule 22) in parts C and D, respectively; the parties' representatives (Rule 23) in Part E; the conduct of hearings (Rule 34) in Part F; witness evidence (Rule 25) in Part G; and the use of tribunal-appointed experts (Rule 26) in Part H. Notably, while the SIAC Rules leave considerable scope for the parties to determine how their arbitration should be conducted, the SIAC Rules (and in particular Rules 19.1, 20.1, and 25.3) have been amended in recent years to make clear that the tribunal has full authority to conduct the arbitration as it considers appropriate.