Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

DVADSIATE VÝROČIE PRIJATIA ROZSUDKU MEDZINÁRODNÉHO SÚDNEHO DVORA VO VECI SÚSTAVY VODNÝCH DIEL GABČÍKOVO – NAGYMAROS

100%
Vršanský P.
Právny obzor. Teoretický časopis pre otázky štátu a práva (Juridical Review. Theoretical journal for the questions of state and law)
|
2018
|
vol. 101
|
issue 2
128 – 141
EN
In its Judgment of 25 September 1997, the Court asserted that Hungary was not entitled to suspend and subsequently abandon, in 1989, the works on the Nagymaros project and on the part of the Gabčíkovo project for which it was responsible. Czechoslovakia was entitled to proceed, in November 1991, to the “provisional solution“. On the other hand, Czechoslovakia was not entitled to put into operation, from October 1992. The Court decided that Hungary and Slovakia must negotiate in good faith in the light of the prevailing situation and must take all necessary measures to ensure the achievement of the objectives of the said Treaty, in accordance with such modalities as they might agree upon. Hungary was to compensate Slovakia for the damage sustained by Czechoslovakia and by Slovakia. Slovakia was to compensate Hungary for the damage it had sustained because of the putting into operation of the dam. In 1998, Slovakia filed in a request for an additional Judgment in the case. Slovakia considered such a Judgment necessary because of the unwillingness of Hungary to implement the Judgment. After the filing by Hungary of a statement of its position on Slovakia’s request, the Parties resumed negotiations and informed the Court on a regular basis of the progress in them.
2

VYLÚČENIE RETROAKTIVITY VO VZŤAHU K AMNESTII?

100%
Vršanský P.
Právny obzor. Teoretický časopis pre otázky štátu a práva (Juridical Review. Theoretical journal for the questions of state and law)
|
2017
|
vol. 100
|
issue 1
4 – 15
EN
The article aims at contributing to the current expert discussion that considers different ways how to derogate the amnesties proclaimed by the President of the Slovak Republic. Different stances exist with regard the issue under consideration: coherence with the international law, violation of international obligations by the Slovak republic, the non-retroactivity issue. The international law acknowledges exemptions from the non-retroactivity principle with regard to treaties. Was it possible to explore per analogiam the international law experience with respect to amnesties derogation? Priority of the international obligations is in force with respect to the Slovak republic to the domestic law regulations.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.