Crises, while unforeseen and exceptional, appear with some regularity. Cri-sis management is not exceptional, but a recurring task. This paper studies the impact of international law on how international crises are handled and the room allowed for emergency measures within international legal dis-courses. It outlines the relationship between an extra-legal exceptionalist perspective, where law is considered an obstacle to emergency measures, and a more constitutionalist one, where exceptional measures are included within the legal paradigms. Examples are drawn from two contemporary crises: the global financial crisis, with particular reference to Iceland and the Icesave dispute, and the treatment of global epidemics and its effect on trade, with particular reference to the pandemic swine influenza A (H1N1). It is suggested that many factors seem to influence the choice of perspec-tive: inter alia previous deviations in similar situations and the institutional solidity of the legal environment of the rule in question. The role for inter-national law in crisis may increase through soft law guidance and persuasive advice from credible organisations that may assess the gravity of the situa-tion and suggest alternative courses of action within the ambit of law.

This article studies the effects of invoking international necessity, to see whether it can be reconciled with an aspiring international rule of law. Any field of application in theory possible, the doctrine is here applied to uses of force, illustrated by humanitarian interventions, actions against international terrorism and the 2004 Construction of a Wall case. Relationships between circumstances precluding wrongfulness and the grounds for treaty termination is examined in light of international practice, studying necessity's impact on the stability of treaty regimes. The author concludes that international tribunals when applying necessity generally heed the rule of law, the stability of treaties and the elevation of overriding norms. Necessity, if successfully invoked, is not perceived to alter substantive obligations. It cannot create a right to assume would-be illegal behaviour. As a result, necessity need not threaten international legal regime building, but may serve as a safety valve, allowing states to remain faithful to general norms, from which they are allowed to deviate only temporarily. In this manner, necessity can even contribute to the rule of law, thanks to its limited scope, constitutionalising emergency powers and subordinating them to pacta sunt servanda.

Den moderna folkrätten har ett utstuderat system för ansvarsutkrävande när en stat svikit de plikter man åtagit sig i förhållande till andra stater. Inom statsansvarsrätten finns dock ett antal ansvarsfrihetsgrunder. En av de mer kontroversiella är den s.k. nödlägesinvändningen. Nödläge har kommit upp i ett antal intressanta internationella rättsfall under de senaste decennierna, bl.a. rörande åtgärder för att skydda miljön, humanitära interventioner och internationell terroristbekämpning. Trots att det fortfarande är ett kontroversiellt institut är det tydligt att stater under vissa omständigheter undgår ansvar för folkrättsbrott om de handlat av nöd. Frågan som diskuteras här är huruvida möjligheten att avvika från internationella åtaganden med hänvisning till ett nödläge kan vara skadlig för den internationella rättens utveckling. Staters tillit till internationella rättsregimer kan skadas och deras benägenhet att reglera sina mellanhavanden i traktatsform minska. Nödlägesinstitutet är dock starkt kringskuret i internationell praxis. Vidare medför det inte att beteendet är att anse som i sig lagligt. Nödläge kan därför i vissa avseenden utan större fara för den internationella rättsordningen utgöra en nödvändig säkerhetsventil.

This article analyzes linkages between litigation in the World Trade Organization (WTO) Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) and negotiation in multilateral trade rounds and develops a typology of links that can occur between the two processes. These include creating conditions where bargaining is informed by law, influencing the agenda-setting and creating momentum for negotiation on key issues, and affecting the status quo from which negotiations proceed by influencing nterpretation of trade rules in the DSB. The purpose is to test whether poor and inexperienced states that are disadvantaged in negotiations can improve their bargaining power in negotiation rounds by pursuing legal proceedings, to see whether links can be exploited for strategy-making to promote the interests of these states, and to discuss how the WTO as an international organization benefits from their empowerment. The strategies suggested in this article could improve the commitment and active participation of relatively non-influential member states. This could be conducive to perceptions of the WTO as a legitimate organization and to a more constructive climate for effective negotiations.

This study has caught a legal development in the making. The Court of Justice has, over the last ten years, developed a body of case law relating to religious matters in connection to EU law which spans a wide range of subject areas; non-discrimination law, data protection, state aid, animal welfare and slaughter rules. Historically, religion in Europe had strong ties to the nation state. The European Court of Human Rights has, in its interpretation of Article 9 ECHR, upheld European supervision of religious freedom in the contracting states. However, due to the lack of European consensus concerning the relationship between state and religion, the Court of Human Rights has left a wide margin of appreciation to the state. The question this study answers is whether the Court of Justice has left a similar margin of discretion to the Member States in its adjudication on religious matters.

By analysing the development over the last ten years, one can discern an EU law on religion which is independent from the Court of Human Rights, and from the Member States. An "EU law on Religion" includes the general principle of religious equality – in Article 21 CFR – and religious freedom – in Article 10 CFR, applied in a uniform way, but also limits of the secular jurisdiction of the Court of Justice and the neutrality of the Union. Although the Union has limited competence in legislating on religious matters in the Member States, it does not hinder Union law from impacting the Member States, since they must organize their relationship to religious matters in conformity with Union law. Article 17(1) TFEU states that the Union shall respect the status of churches and religious organizations under national law, but this article has not been interpreted by the Court of Justice as safeguarding the traditions of the Member States. In contrast, this study advances an understanding of Union law greatly relevant to religion in the Member States.

I uppsatsen undersöks tolkningen och tillämpningen av undantaget från mervärdesskatt för förvaltning av särskilda investeringsfonder ur en EU-rättslig synvinkel. I svensk lagstiftning finns undantaget stadgat i 3 kap. 9 § ML. Motsvarande artikel i mervärdesskattedirektivet är art. 135.1 g). I uppsatsen undersöks hur det svenska lagrummet förhåller sig till EU-rätten. Dessutom undersöks huruvida en direktivkonform tolkning av den nationella bestämmelsen bör göras, samt om art. 135.1 g) skulle kunna åberopas med direkt effekt i en svensk domstol.

This thesis deals with the phenomenon of states concluding international agreements that are, explicitly or impliedly, of a non-legal character. It is first of all argued that states have the option under international law to conclude legally binding agreements or agreements that lack this quality. Subsequently, the thesis addresses the question of how to differentiate a legally binding transaction from a non-legal one. By means of an analysis of the substantive elements of treaties and unilateral declarations it is found that the distinction primarily relates to the subjective intention of the representatives concluding the agreement or making the declaration. Relating this subjective substantive element to the manifestly informal character of the concept of treaty and thenotion of unilateral declaration, i.e., the general lack of mandatory requirements as to the form of a valid transaction, it is concluded that an objective determination of the status of an ambiguous international transactionis often problematic. The question of the material differences between legally binding international agreements and non-legal agreements is also assessed. It is argued that there are substantial and important differences, and,consequently, that it is important to maintain the distinction.

The theoretical observations made in relation to the phenomenon of non-legal agreements are also related to a defined empirical material-i.e., five multilateral export control regimes on the non-proliferation of weapons ofmass destruction. The analysis of the status of the foundational documents of these regimes largely corroborates the theoretical observations made as to the problems of determining the formal status of an ambiguous international agreement. The tentative conclusions drawn as to the status of the export control regimes under international law are subsequently related to a discussion of the domestic implementation of the regimes in one country. This study corroborates the finding that the foundational documents of the multilateral export control regimes are of a non-legal character.

The issues raised in this thesis concern the adverse effects of EU's wildlife trade regulations, mainly the unequal treatment of captive and wild-born endangered animals. The nature of these regulations is analyzed from an animal law perspective. The purpose of the analysis is to determine whether the regulations are anthropocentric and, if so, what issues arise from it. Previous research has studied the legal personhood of animals in relation to animal welfare. This thesis continues that discussion by examining legal animal rights as a potential solution to the issues of wildlife trade. The analysis is pragmatic and employs a non-formalistic view of law. Consequentially, it uses a doctrinal and legal philosophical approach, meaning that sources outside of law are integral to the discussion. The results of the analysis show that EU’s wildlife trade regulations are anthropocentric and that this has led to severe issues regarding the welfare of endangered animals. In addition, the practical enforcement of the regulations has proven defective. Legal rights for animals seem to provide a viable solution to these issues, yet their practical implementation is complicated. The reasons for this are primarily financial and opinion-based. Therefore, a step-by-step approach, starting with limited fundamental rights and resulting in full legal personhood for animals, is recommended for this approach to be successful.