James Harrison joined the School of Law as a member of academic staff in July 2007. He holds law degrees from the University of Edinburgh (PhD, LLM) and the University of East Anglia (LLB). James teaches on a number of international law courses, including specialist courses in the law of the sea, international environmental law, and international investment law.
Ph.D. supervision interests
International Law of the SeaInternational Environmental Law
James’ research interests span several areas of international law, including law of the sea, international economic law and international environmental law. In all of these areas, he is particularly interested in the role that international organizations and international courts and tribunals play in the development of international law. He has published widely on these topics, including a monograph, an edited collection, and a range articles in leading international law journals.
International Environmental Law (LLM)
International Investment Law (LLM) (Course Organiser)
International Law of the Marine Environment (LLM) (Course Organiser)
International Law of the Sea (LLM) (Course Organiser)
WTO Law (Honours) (Course Organiser)
WTO Law (LLM) (Course Organiser)
Dawoon Jung 'The 1982 Law of the Sea Convention and Offshore Renewable Energy Activities'
Ke Song 'The future of the compulsory procedures under UNCLOS : Understanding its preconditions, limitations and exceptions'
Mihail Vatsov 'Making international fisheries conservation law: What role for the EU?'
Books and Reports
James Harrison, Saving the Oceans through Law: The International Legal Framework for the Protection of the Marine Environment, (Oxford University Press, 2017)
James Harrison, Elisa Morgera, Terje Lobach, Pio Manoa, Review and Analysis of International Legal and Policy Instruments Related to Deep-Sea Fisheries and Biodiversity Conservation in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction, (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2017)
Abstract: The purpose of this document is to identify the range of instruments that are relevant to deep-sea fishing and its impacts on marine biological diversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction, with a view to providing advice to states on what steps may be necessary to implement these instruments at the national level. The document is specifically targeted to government officials who wish to familiarize themselves with the international instruments related to deep-sea fishing and its impacts on marine biological diversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction, as of January 2017.
James Harrison, The European Union and South Korea: The Legal Framework for Strengthening Trade, Economic and Political Relations, (Edinburgh University Press, 2013)
Abstract: This title offers insights into the state of EU-Korea relations and considers potential lessons for other bilateral and regional initiatives. The past decade has witnessed a proliferation of bilateral and regional cooperation in all parts of the world, the EU and South Korea have been involved in this trend. In 2010, they launched a strategic partnership in order to strengthen their trade, economic and political ties. This partnership is underpinned by a number of important legal instruments, including the EU-Korea Free Trade Agreement and the EU-Korea Framework Agreement. This book analysis the development of EU-Korea relations and the role that these treaties play in the development of the strategic partnership. The book contains contributions by European and Korean experts in international law who each examine a particular aspect of the legal framework for EU-Korea relations, analysing the scope and substance of the relevant legal rules, as well as the opportunities and challenges for future cooperation. The contributions cover a wide range of policy areas, including trade, competition, and investment, as well as cooperation in non-economic areas, such as environmental protection and security policy. The contributions to this volume aim to offer insights not only into the state of EU-Korea relations, but also potential lessons for other bilateral and regional initiatives. Features: the main case study is the EU-Korea strategic partnership; regular comparisons that are made with the Korea-US relationship; and various chapters discuss the implications of the EU-Korea FTA and Framework Agreement for future EU agreements with third states.
James Harrison, Making the Law of the Sea: A Study in the Development of International Law, (Cambridge University Press, 2011)
Abstract: This book examines how various international organisations have contributed to the development of the law of the sea and what kinds of instruments and law-making techniques have been used.
James Harrison, 'Patrolling the boundaries of Coastal State Enforcement Powers: The interpretation and application of UNCLOS safeguards relating to the arrest of foreign-flagged ships', (2018), L'Observateur des Nations Unies, Vol 42, pp 117-143
Abstract: The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) established a new «legal order for the seas and oceans», which dictates the extent of states’ rights and obligations at sea. One of the central issues in the negotiation of UNCLOS was the extent of coastal states’ legislative and enforcement jurisdiction. The Convention often subjects those powers to explicit limitations or conditions that seek to prevent the coastal state from interfering with legitimate activities. These safeguards were specifically negotiated and the precise limitations or conditions that apply will depend upon the nature of the enforcement power and where it is being exercised. This article offers a critical analysis of the key trends in the recent case law in which such safeguards have been interpreted and applied, and in performing this role, how courts and tribunals have developed the balance of rights and obligations implicit in the Convention.
James Harrison, 'Significant International Environmental Law Cases 2016-17 ', (2017), Journal of Environmental Law, Vol 29, pp 553-563
James Harrison, '2. Marine Pollution: Ocean dumping', (2017), Yearbook of International Environmental Law, Vol 26, pp 196-204
James Harrison, 'Book review: Whaling and International Law', (2017), The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, Vol 32, pp 190-192
James Harrison, Thomas Appleby, 'Brexit and the future of Scottish fisheries: Key legal issues in a changing regulatory landscape', (2017), Journal of Water Law, Vol 25, pp 124-132
James Harrison, 'Defining disputes and characterizing claims: Subject-matter jurisdiction in Law of the Sea Convention litigation', (2017), Ocean Development and International Law, Vol 48, pp 269-283
Abstract: The Law of the Sea Convention (LOSC) is well-known for containing a compulsory dispute settlement system in Part XV, which allows most disputes to be submitted to binding adjudication or arbitration. Yet, the ability to bring a claim under the LOSC is premised upon meeting certain conditions contained in the Convention's compromissory clause. This article examines those requirements relating to jurisdiction ratione materiae or subject-matter jurisdiction under LOSC and how they have been interpreted in the recent jurisprudence of courts and tribunals.
James Harrison, 'Significant International Environmental Law Cases: 2015-16 ', (2016), Journal of Environmental Law
Abstract: This review of significant international environmental cases covers the period from May 2015 to July 2016. A range of judicial bodies feature in these summaries, including the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the World Trade Organisation (WTO) Appellate Body and ad hoc arbitral tribunals in the field of the Law of the Sea and international investment law. The cases illustrate the role that courts and tribunals play in not only settling disputes, but also in developing international rules relating to the protection of the environment, through the interpretation of treaties and the identification of customary international law. These are both iterative processes and many of the cases that feature in this review show how courts and tribunals build upon the existing jurisprudence by either clarifying earlier judicial pronouncements or by applying previous case law to a new situation or context. The cases also demonstrate the continuing innovations in procedural mechanisms to deal with environmental cases, particularly through the use of independent experts to assist judges with making findings of fact on contested scientific issues.
James Harrison, 'Environmental Counterclaims in Investor-State Arbitration: Comment on Perenco v Ecuador, ICSID Case No. ARB/08/6', (2016), Journal of World Investment and Trade, Vol 17, pp 479-488
James Harrison, 'Current Legal Developments: The Arctic Sunrise Arbitration (Netherlands v. Russia)', (2016), The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, Vol 31, pp 145–159
James Harrison, 'Significant International Environmental Law Cases: 2014–15 ', (2015), Journal of Environmental Law, Vol 27, pp 541-554
James Harrison, 'Significant International Environmental Law Cases: 2012–14', (2014), Journal of Environmental Law, Vol 26, pp 519–540
James Harrison, 'The Precautionary Principle in Marine Environmental Law: With Special Reference to High-Risk Vessels, Bénédicte Sage-Fuller ', (2014), Environmental Law Review, Vol 16, pp 84-85
Alan Boyle, James Harrison, 'Judicial Settlement of International Environmental Disputes: Current Problems', (2013), Journal of International Dispute Settlement, Vol 4, pp 245-76
Abstract: Muddling through might be one way to describe the present state of international environmental litigation. The fragmented character of international environmental law results in significant jurisdictional problems whatever forum is chosen, but the solutions are far from obvious. When it comes to evidence and proof, all the systems examined here accept that environmental cases are to some degree special, but there is no consensus on how to handle them. Even public interest environmental litigation, a widely accepted concept in other legal systems, becomes more questionable when replicated in international law, where alternative forms of dispute resolution are available. Is the answer to create a specialist international environmental court? The idea receives little support in academic writing, and appeals only to activists. Despite the problems examined here, the existing structure of international courts has much to commend it. Rather than indulge in radical reform, it seems better to identify more modest changes that would make the present ad hoc system a better vehicle for the settlement of environmental disputes.
James Harrison, 'Reflections on the Role of International Courts and Tribunals in the Settlement of Environmental Disputes and the Development of International Environmental Law ', (2013), Journal of Environmental Law, Vol 25, pp 501-14
Abstract: This article explains and analyses key trends in the environmental jurisprudence of international courts and tribunals over the past decade. It starts by discussing the different jurisdictional bases that are available to bring environmental claims at the international level, as well as some of the problems that arise from the current consent-based system of international dispute settlement. The article then turns to examine the growing cross-fertilisation that is evident in the environmental case law. The article provides examples of this phenomenon in relation to the interpretation of substantive rules on environmental protection and in relation to the development of procedural mechanisms to deal with certain challenging aspects of environmental litigation.
James Harrison, 'The International Law Commission and the Development of International Investment Law ', (2013), George Washington International Law Review, Vol 45, pp 1-30
Abstract: International investment law has assumed an increasing prominencelargely due to the proliferation of investment treaties and the number ofarbitral awards made thereunder. Yet, there are many core questionsthat remain to be authoritatively answered. This Article considers thenature of the divergences in investment treaty jurisprudence and the rolethat the International Law Commission (ILC) could potentially play incontributing to the coherent development of international investmentlaw. The Article argues that some areas of international investment laware more appropriate for attention by the ILC than others. It draws adistinction between those aspects of international investment that onlyhave a basis in treaty law and those aspects of international investmentlaw that are underpinned by common standards stemming from custom-ary international law or general principles of law.The Article argues that international investment scholars cannot nec-essarily expect the convergence of jurisprudence in the context of treatyprovisions that have been specifically negotiated by the parties, as theseprovisions must be interpreted on a case-by-case basis. This means thattopics like the most-favored-nation (MFN) clause are less suitable for cod-ification, as the meaning of these provisions will often depend on theparticular context of the treaty and the precise intentions of the parties.In contrast, there is a stronger case for the codification of internationalinvestment law where common standards exist. The Article thereforeconsiders the formation and development of customary international lawin relation to investment protection. It argues that while investmenttreaty tribunals have struggled with the identification of customary inter-national law in this area, the ILC could play a central role in clarifyingthe state of the relevant rules and principles, in furtherance of its coremandate of promoting the progressive development and codification ofinternational law.
James Harrison, 'Book Review: Selected Contemporary Issues in the Law of the Sea edited by Clive R Symmons', (2012), Journal of International Maritime Law, pp 253-54
James Harrison, 'Significant International Environmental Cases: 2011-12', (2012), Journal of Environmental Law, Vol 24, pp 559-77
James Harrison, 'The Life and Death of BITs: Legal Issues concerning Survival Clauses and the Termination of Investment Treaties', (2012), Journal of World Investment and Trade, Vol 13, pp 928-50
Abstract: This article considers a number of legal issues that arise when states decide to terminate treaties providing protection to foreign investors. This is an area that is governed both by specific provisions in investment treaties, as well as by principles of general international law. The article considers two particular mechanisms that seek to promote legal certainty for investors by limiting the ability of states to peremptorily revoke the protection offered by investment treaties. Firstly, it considers minimum periods of application. Secondly, it analyzes so-called survival clauses, which serve to extend the application of a treaty to established investors for a particular period of time after its unilateral termination. The article compares the scope of these provisions under a variety of investment treaties in order to identify differences in state practice. It also discusses the limits of these mechanisms against the backdrop of general international law. Finally, the article considers whether protection is also available for established investors when both parties to an investment treaty mutually agree to terminate the treaty. In this context, the article looks at the theory of third party rights and its application in the context of investment treaties.
James Harrison, 'The Transformation of International Environmental Law edited by Yann Kerbrat and Sandrine Maljean-Dubois ', (2011), Environmental Law Review, Vol 13, pp 352-53
James Harrison, 'Book Review: Trade Law and Regulation in Korea edited by Seung Wha Chang and Won-Mog Choi ', (2011), Climate Law, pp 296-298
James Harrison, 'Transparency and Public Participation in International Economic Law: A Case Study of the Korea-EU Free Trade Agreement', (2011), Sungkyunkwan Journal of Science & Technology Law, pp 1-18
James Harrison, 'Significant International Environmental Cases: 2010-11', (2011), Journal of Environmental Law, Vol 22, pp 517-32
James Harrison, 'The Manual of International Courts and Tribunals. Ed by Ruth MacKenzie, Cesare Romano, and Yuval Shany, with Philippe Sands ', (2011), Edinburgh Law Review, Vol 15, pp 340-42
James Harrison, 'Significant International Environmental Cases: 2009-10 ', (2010), Journal of Environmental Law, pp 499-507
James Harrison, 'Recent Developments to Promote Transparency and Public Participation in Investment Treaty Arbitration ', (2010), L'Observateur des Nations Unies, Vol 29, pp 119-37
Abstract: In the past, concerns have been expressed about the secrecy of international treaty arbitration. This paper attempts to show how the investment treaty arbitration system has responded to these criticisms. It starts by reviewing the arguments in favour of transparency and what different forms transparency can take in the context of investment treaty arbitration. The paper then sketches out the main developments in relation to transparency and highlights key issues that still remain to be resolved. In conclusion, it is noted that the extent of publicity and publication participation in a particular arbitration will depend on the instrument under which the claim is being brought. Whilst a small number of states have sought to promote the transparency agenda in their investment treaties, much more could be done by the majority of states.
James Harrison, 'Significant International Environmental Cases: 2009-10', (2010), Journal of Environmental Law, Vol 22, pp 499-507
James Harrison, 'Regime Pluralism and the Global Regulation of Oil Pollution Liability and Compensation ', (2009), International Journal of Law in Context, Vol 5, pp 379-91
Abstract: Whilst international law has traditionally been dominated by states, non-state actors today have an increasing influence on many spheres of international life. This paper argues that non-state actors, in particular business interest non-governmental organisations (BINGOs), not only participate actively within those inter-governmental regimes which have been created by states, but they are also able to establish their own private regimes on particular issues in which they have an interest. The global regulation of oil pollution liability and compensation is used as an example to show how inter-governmental and private regimes can overlap and interact with one another. Such interplay poses several challenges for the way in which we understand traditional state-centred international law-making. At the same time, private regimes themselves raise their own questions of legitimacy and effectiveness.
James Harrison, 'Marine Resource Law by Ronan Long ', (2009), International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol 58, pp 745-46
James Harrison, 'Judging the Judges: The New Scheme for Judicial Conduct and Discipline in Scotland', (2009), Edinburgh Law Review, Vol 13, pp 427-44
James Harrison, 'Current Legal Developments - The International Convention for the Safe and Environmentally Sound Recycling of Ships ', (2009), The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, Vol 24, pp 727-736
James Harrison, 'International Law - Significant Environmental Cases: 2008-09', (2009), Journal of Environmental Law, Vol 21, pp 501-11
James Harrison, 'Current Legal Developments - International Labour Organization ', (2008), The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, Vol 23, pp 125-35
James Harrison, 'The Yearbook of European Environmental Law, Volume 7. Ed by Thijs Etty and Han Somsen ', (2008), Edinburgh Law Review, Vol 12, pp 503-05
James Harrison, 'The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law. Ed by Daniel Bodansky, Jutta Brunnée and Ellen Hey ', (2008), Edinburgh Law Review, Vol 12, pp 156-58
James Harrison, 'Conflicting Interpretations - The Slops Incident and the Application of the International Oil Pollution Liability and Compensation Regime to Offshore Storage and Transfer Operations ', (2008), Journal of Environmental Law, Vol 20, pp 455-64
Abstract: This analysis discusses recent developments in the international regime for oil pollution liability and compensation. It considers whether or not the regime is applicable to certain offshore storage and transfer operations. The analysis takes into account developments in the policy of the International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund on this topic, as well as the decisions of the Greek courts in the case of the Slops incident. It concludes that the current scope of the regime is unclear and there is a need to promote greater uniformity in the interpretation of the international regime.
James Harrison, 'Legal and Political Oversight of WTO Waivers ', (2008), Journal of International Economic Law, Vol 11, pp 411-25
Abstract: This article discusses the legal and political processes available within the WTO for the scrutiny and oversight of waivers. These procedures include the initial approval procedures, as well as procedures for overseeing the implementation of waivers once they have been approved. It is submitted that certain aspects of a waiver are inherently political and the principal mechanisms for their oversight are therefore through the political organs of the WTO. Dispute settlement is, however, available as a tool for determining whether or not a WTO Member has complied with the substantive terms and conditions of a waiver. In this light, this article considers the legal status of waivers in the context of dispute settlement. It concludes that waivers are best characterized as exceptions so that the state invoking the waiver bears the burden of proving that the terms and conditions have been met. The article also suggests that there is no need for a narrow interpretation of waivers and that the customary international law rules of treaty interpretation should apply.
James Harrison, 'International Law - Significant Environmental Cases: 2007-08', (2008), Journal of Environmental Law, Vol 20, pp 475-81
James Harrison, 'Significant International Environmental Law Cases ', (2007), Journal of Environmental Law, Vol 19, pp 409-17
James Harrison, 'Judicial Law-Making and the Developing Order of the Oceans ', (2007), The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, Vol 22, pp 283-302
Abstract: This article explores the powers of courts and tribunals in developing the legal order of the oceans. It is generally accepted that the rules of treaty interpretation allow courts to look beyond the strict confines of a treaty to other sources of evidence. Such an approach allows an evolutionary interpretation which takes into account the contemporaneous views of the parties. In practice, courts and tribunals have adopted a pragmatic approach to the interpretation of the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention in light of other rules of international law. By doing so, they promote flexibility in the Convention regime, albeit at the risk of undermining the transparency and legitimacy of their decisions. In the context of the applicable law, the 1982 Convention seeks to safeguard itself against change by asserting priority over other sources of law. From a practical perspective, the role of courts in developing the Convention is limited by the fact that few decisions have come before the courts to date. Thus, it is clear that courts by themselves cannot provide a satisfactory mechanism for change in the legal order of the oceans.
James Harrison, 'Significant International Environmental Law Cases ', (2006), Journal of Environmental Law, Vol 18, pp 505-516
James Harrison, 'Significant International Environmental Law Cases 2004 ', (2005), Journal of Environmental Law, Vol 17, pp 447-53
James Harrison, 'Significant International Environmental Law Cases 2003 ', (2005), Journal of Environmental Law, Vol 17, pp 137-41
James Harrison, 'Exceptions in multilateral environmental agreements ' in Exceptions in International Law ( 2018)
James Harrison, 'Key Challenges Relating to the Governance of Regional Fisheries ' in Richard Caddell, Erik Molenaar (ed.) Strengthening International Fisheries Law in an Era of Changing Oceans (Hart Publishing 2017)
James Harrison, 'International Investment Law and the Regulation of the Seabed ' in Catherine Banet (ed.) The Law of the Seabed ( 2017)
James Harrison, 'Article 202 - Scientific and technical assistance to developing States ' in Alexander Proelß (ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Beck/Hart/Nomos 2017) 1346-1352
James Harrison, 'Article 203 - Preferential treatment for developing States ' in Alexander Proelß (ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Beck/Hart/Nomos 2017) 1352-1356
James Harrison, 'Article 73 - Enforcement of laws and regulations of the coastal State ' in Alexander Proelß (ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Beck/Hart/Nomos 2017) 556-563
James Harrison, 'Article 72 - Restriction on transfer of rights ' in Alexander Proelß (ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Beck/Hart/Nomos 2017) 554-556
James Harrison, Elisa Morgera, 'Article 61 - Conservation of the living resources ' in Alexander Proelß (ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Beck/Hart/Nomos 2017) 480-493
James Harrison, 'Article 70 - Right of geographically disadvantaged States ' in Alexander Proelß (ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Beck/Hart/Nomos 2017) 548-552
James Harrison, 'Article 71 - Non-applicability of articles 69 and 70 ' in Alexander Proelß (ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Beck/Hart/Nomos 2017) 552-556
James Harrison, Elisa Morgera, 'Article 62 - Utilization of the living resources ' in Alexander Proelß (ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Beck/Hart/Nomos 2017) 493-506
James Harrison, 'Article 67- Catadromous Stocks ' in Alexander Proelß (ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Beck/Hart/Nomos 2017) 536-540
James Harrison, 'Article 68 - Sedentary Species ' in Alexander Proelß (ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: A Commentary (Beck/Hart/Nomos 2017) 540-543
James Harrison, 'Article 69 - Right of Land-locked States ' in Alexander Proelß (ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Beck/Hart/Nomos 2017) 543-548
James Harrison, Elisa Morgera, 'Article 65 - Marine Mammals ' in Alexander Proelß (ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Beck/Hart/Nomos 2017) 519-527
James Harrison, 'Article 66 - Anadromous Stocks ' in Alexander Proelß (ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Beck/Hart/Nomos 2017) 527-353
James Harrison, Elisa Morgera, 'Article 64 - Highly migratory species ' in Alexander Proelß (ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Beck/Hart/Nomos 2017) 513-519
James Harrison, Elisa Morgera, 'Article 63 - Stocks occurring within the exclusive economic zones of two or more coastal States or both within the exclusive economic zone and in an area beyond or adjacent to it ' in Alexander Proelß (ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Beck/Hart/Nomos 2017) 506-513
James Harrison, 'Resources of the International Seabed Area ' in Elisa Morgera, Kati Kulovesi (ed.) Research Handbook on International Law and Natural Resources (Edward Elgar 2016) 390-410
James Harrison, 'Pollution of the Marine Environment from or Through the Atmosphere ' in David Attard, Malgosia Fitzmaurice, Norman Martinez Gutierrez, Riyaz Hamza (ed.) The IMLI Manual on International Maritime Law (Oxford University Press 2016) 169
James Harrison, 'Addressing the Procedural Challenges of Environmental Litigation in the Context of Investor-State Arbitration ' in Yulia Levashova, Tineke Lambooy, Ige Dekker (ed.) Bridging the Gap between International Investment Law and the Environment (eleven international publishing 2016) 87-110
James Harrison, 'Law of the Sea Convention Institutions ' in Donald R. Rothwell, Alex G. Oude Elferink, Karen N. Scott, Tim Stephens (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of the Law of the Sea (Oxford University Press 2015) 373-394
James Harrison, 'Safeguards against Excessive Enforcement Measures in the Exclusive Economic Zone - Law and Practice ' in Henrik Ringbom (ed.) Jurisdiction over Ships (Brill 2015) 217-249
James Harrison, 'Actors and Institutions for the Protection of the Marine Environment ' in Rosemary Rayfuse (ed.) Research Handbook on International Marine Environmental Law (Edward Elgar 2015) 57-78
James Harrison, 'Overview of the EU-Korea Free Trade Agreement ' in James Harrison (ed.) The European Union and South Korea (Edinburgh University Press 2013) 57-65
Abstract: This chapter provides a general overview of the EU-Korea FTA. The chapter begins by giving a brief drafting history of the instrument, as well as explaining the expected economic benefits of the agreement for both parties. It then outlines the scope of the FTA, paying particular attention to the dispute settlement procedures in Chapter 14 of the FTA. This chapter is intended to provide background material for the more detailed discussion of specific aspects of the FTA in Part 2 of the book.
James Harrison, 'Overview of the EU-Korea Framework Agreement ' in James Harrison (ed.) The European Union and South Korea (Edinburgh University Press 2013) 149-59
Abstract: This chapter provides a general overview of the 2010 EU-Korea Framework Agreement, as background material to the more detailed discussion of particular aspects of the Framework Agreement in Part 3 of the book. The chapter starts by giving a brief drafting history of the instrument followed by an explanation of its structure. Given that the Agreement relies upon further cooperation between the parties to achieve many of its aims, the chapter also considers the various mechanisms through which the agreement could be implemented by the parties, including regular bilateral consultation and political dialogue, joint projects, cooperation within the framework of other international or regional organisations, or the negotiation of additional sectoral agreements.
James Harrison, 'The Legal Framework for Investment Protection between the European Union and Korea Towards a Level Playing Field for Investors?' in James Harrison (ed.) The European Union and South Korea (Edinburgh University Press 2013) 102-23
Abstract: Investment has traditionally been regulated at the international level through bilateral investment treaties (BITs). Therefore, individual EU Member States have concluded their own BITs with third states, including Korea. As a result, the standards that currently apply to European and Korean investors will often vary depending on which BIT, if any, applies to them. Yet, recent amendments to the scope of the common commercial policy under the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union mean that the EU is now competent to enter into treaties on this subject matter by itself. This development offers the opportunity to negotiate a uniform legal framework that applies equally to all European and Korean investors. This chapter starts by explaining the key areas of divergence in existing BIT practice. It then goes on to explain the extent to which investment is addressed under the EU-Korea FTA in the provisions on establishment and payments and capital movements. Having found that the FTA falls short of establishing a uniform regime for the protection of investors, the chapter explores the legal issues that may arise in the negotiation of a comprehensive EU-Korea investment agreement.
James Harrison, 'Recent Developments and Continuing Challenges in the Regulation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from International Shipping ' in Aldo Chircop, Scott Coffen-Smout, Moira McConnell (ed.) Ocean Yearbook (Martinus Nijhoff 2013) 359-84
James Harrison, 'An Introduction to the Legal Framework for EU-Korea Relations ' in James Harrison (ed.) The European Union and South Korea (Edinburgh University Press 2013) 3-20
Abstract: The launch of the EU-Korea Strategic Partnership in 2010 raises questions about the nature and scope of this relationship. This chapter considers the reasons why states decide to pursue bilateral and regional cooperation before giving a general introduction to the development of EU-Korea relations. It explains the history of EU engagement in Asia and the gradual evolution of closer ties with Korea, which was chosen as a priority partner because it is one of the principal economic powerhouses in the region. The chapter notes that this relationship is based upon a number of legal instruments and it discusses the implications of the legalisation of EU-Korea relations. The chapter aims to set the scene for the more detailed discussion of particular aspects of EU-Korea relations in subsequent chapters of the book.
James Harrison, 'United Kingdom ' in Wenhua Shan (ed.) The Legal Protection of Foreign Investment (Hart Publishing 2012) 661-95
James Harrison, 'The Regulation of Marine Resources in the United Kingdom ' in Estansilao Arana Garcia, Francisco Javier Sanz Larruga, Asensio Navarro Ortega (ed.) La Ordenacion Juridica del Medio Marino en Espana (Thomson Reuters 2012) 729-60
James Harrison, 'The Role of International Conventions in Solving Transboundary Pollution Disputes ' in Michael Faure, Song Ying (ed.) China and International Environmental Liability (Edward Elgar 2008) 38-63
James Harrison, 'Sea and Continental Shelf ' in The Laws of Scotland (Butterworths and the Law Society of Scotland 2006)
James Harrison, 'Safeguards Against Excessive Enforcement Measures in the Exclusive Economic Zone – Law and Practice ' 2014
Abstract: This paper addresses the issue of enforcement powers of coastal states within the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and the situations in which those powers may be exercised against ships navigating in this zone. It reflects upon the nature of the powers conferred upon coastal states, as well as the safeguards that are imposed upon the exercise of those powers. In particular, the paper will consider how the law of the sea strikes a balance between the interest of coastal states in ensuring that rules and regulations in the EEZ are enforced and the interest of flag states in ensuring that there is no encroachment upon legitimate freedom of navigation. The paper will consider the relevant provisions of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, as well as how these provisions have been interpreted and applied in practice in the jurisprudence of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.
James Harrison, 'The Sustainable Development of Mineral Resources in the International Seabed Area: The Role of the Authority in Balancing Economic Development and Environmental Protection' 2014
Abstract: This paper considers recent developments in the international regime for the exploration and exploitation of seabed minerals beyond national jurisdiction. In particular, it analyses the role of the International Seabed Authority in regulating access to seabed mineral resources and the mechanisms through which the Authority balances the objectives of economic development and environmental protection.
James Harrison, 'The International Law Commission and the Development of International Investment Law ' 2013
James Harrison, 'Recent Developments to Promote Transparency and Public Participation in Investment Treaty Arbitration ' 2011
Abstract: In the past, concerns have been expressed about the secrecy of international treaty arbitration. This paper attempts to show how the investment treaty arbitration system has responded to these criticisms. It starts by reviewing the arguments in favour of transparency and what different forms transparency can take in the context of investment treaty arbitration. The paper then sketches out the main developments in relation to transparency and highlights key issues that still remain to be resolved. In conclusion it is noted that the extent of publicity and public participation in a particular arbitration will depend on the instrument under which the claim is being brought. Whilst a small number of states have sought to promote the transparency agenda in their investment treaties, more could be done by the majority of states.
James Harrison, 'The Regulation of Marine Resources in the United Kingdom ' 2011
Abstract: The legal regime for the regulation of marine resources in the United Kingdom has undergone significant reforms over the past few years. The introduction of the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 was the first step towards the more integrated management of marine resources in United Kingdom waters. Yet, the achievement of this aim is complicated by the arrangements for the devolution of power to regional administrations throughout the United Kingdom. This paper looks at the regime established by the Act and the challenges for its implementation.The move toward integrated marine management has partly been a response to initiatives at the international level. The first part of the paper therefore discusses the relevant sources of international law and EU law which apply to the management of marine resources. The paper then describes the development of the regime for the management of marine resources within the United Kingdom and it analyses the main features of that regime. In particular, it considers marine spatial planning, marine licensing and marine protected areas. The paper concludes that whilst the 2009 Act and related legislation mark an important development in marine policy in the United Kingdom, integrated marine management will require on-going cooperation between the devolved administrations, as well as other decision-makers involved in marine policy.
James Harrison, 'Harmonization of International Investment Law: Illustrations from the Case of Suez, Sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona S.A., Vivendi Universal S.A. and AWG Group v Argentine Republic' 2010
Abstract: Arbitral tribunals charged with deciding investment treaty disputes have sought to harmonize the interpretation of those treaties in such a way that one can begin to speak of an emerging jurisprudence constante on certain issues of international investment law. One recent case which clearly demonstrates this trend for harmonization is Suez, Sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona S.A., Vivendi Universal S.A. and AWG Group v Argentine Republic. This note considers how the claims made by the investors were dealt with by the tribunal. In particular, it will pay attention to whether or not differences in the language of the three BITs at issue in this case had any impact on the decision of the tribunal. It will also consider how the tribunal used previous investment arbitral awards in its reasoning. It is argued that the most convincing way of harmonizing the substantive standards of the three BITs would be to consider them as incorporating customary international law standards, as was implicitly done with the expropriation standard in this case. In contrast, the reasons for following previous arbitral awards are less convincing when the substantive rules being applied are interpreted as an autonomous treaty standard. In these circumstances, interpretation is not an appropriate technique for harmonizing international investment law, given inherent differences in the language and context of investment treaties. It does not follow that harmonization cannot occur, however. The MFN clause could be used so that a better standard of treatment is applied to all investors, as was done in relation to the procedural prerequisites in this case.
James Harrison, 'The International Seabed Authority and the Development of the Legal Regime for Deep Seabed Mining ' 2010
Abstract: The International Seabed Authority was established in 1994 in order to oversee the exploration and exploitation of the deep seabed for minerals. The deep seabed is designated as the common heritage of mankind. The Authority is responsible for managing the mineral resources in this area on behalf of the international community. The legal framework for deep seabed mining is found in Part XI of the Law of the Sea Convention. However, the Convention was not intended to contain a comprehensive framework for seabed mining and the Authority was also invested with powers to adopt rules and regulations to fill in the gaps in Part XI of the Convention. This paper considers the scope and limits of those powers. It analyses the processes and procedures which apply to the law-making powers conferred on the Authority and to what extent the exercise of these powers amounts to quasi-legislative activity. Finally, it considers what mechanisms are available to control the ability of the Authority to make rules and regulations.
James Harrison, 'Promoting the Integrity of the International Regime on Oil Pollution Compensation and Liability ' 2009
Abstract: The international regime on oil pollution liability and compensation was intended to harmonise national laws on this subject in order to ensure adequate compensation for oil pollution victims. The success of the regime depends upon both its effective implementation into national law and a consistent and uniform interpretation by national courts. In practice, the uniform interpretation of the international regime has proven to be a challenge because of the different approaches taken by national courts towards the interpretation of the treaties. It is argued in this paper that the contracting parties to the treaties underlying the international regime already have a power to adopt authoritative interpretations. Whilst some decisions of the International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund may qualify as authoritative interpretations, it has been suggested that this power is perhaps better exercised through the International Maritime Organization, given its broader membership. Where an authoritative interpretation has been adopted, states and their courts are under an international obligation to follow that interpretation. However, there is currently no mechanism at the international level to monitor and promote compliance by national authorities. It is therefore argued that tentative discussions on monitoring the implementation of the international regime should be stepped up with a view to creating a formal compliance mechanism.