1 00:00:00,180 --> 00:00:11,760 Very much for this kind of presentation. And thank you very much for for the invitation and thanks to everyone for being here. 2 00:00:11,760 --> 00:00:17,850 It is a great pleasure for me to be giving this presentation to to this group. 3 00:00:17,850 --> 00:00:24,510 And I'm sorry, I can't physically be in Oxford with you. 4 00:00:24,510 --> 00:00:30,270 Of course, we wouldn't have some of the participants that we have today. 5 00:00:30,270 --> 00:00:36,480 So without further ado, I'm going to go into the presentation. 6 00:00:36,480 --> 00:00:49,860 So I'm going to discuss equity in international law, and I will I will indeed draw from the recent book, 7 00:00:49,860 --> 00:00:56,640 my recent book on the function of equity in international law. But that said, I'm not going to present the book. 8 00:00:56,640 --> 00:01:03,450 I'm going to present part of the argument that I developed in the book. 9 00:01:03,450 --> 00:01:08,160 And that is that equity is part of international law. 10 00:01:08,160 --> 00:01:14,040 So this is a position that may be contested and not everyone will agree with me. 11 00:01:14,040 --> 00:01:24,180 So I will again focus on part of of of this argument, which is the main argument in the book. 12 00:01:24,180 --> 00:01:34,770 I would like to start by saying that my interest in equity is part of a bigger interrogation about justice in international law. 13 00:01:34,770 --> 00:01:46,470 The purpose of equity is to do justice. And the question that one can ask is, you know, does international law do justice? 14 00:01:46,470 --> 00:01:50,250 Does international law have the potential to do justice? 15 00:01:50,250 --> 00:02:06,990 And even can we even perceive of a concept of justice as such an international law, a concept that may be understood in the same way by everyone? 16 00:02:06,990 --> 00:02:13,080 I'm not going to. I don't even pretend to try to answer these questions. 17 00:02:13,080 --> 00:02:17,670 I just wanted to give the context for equity. 18 00:02:17,670 --> 00:02:27,600 And in the times that I have, what I'm going to do is first, I'm going to discuss what equity is. 19 00:02:27,600 --> 00:02:30,720 I will not try to give a definition of equity, 20 00:02:30,720 --> 00:02:40,680 equities and understood in so many different ways that I think that an attempt to define equity is not particularly useful. 21 00:02:40,680 --> 00:02:50,490 I will try to focus on the content of equity, and I will try to focus on examples or two to show what equity can do, 22 00:02:50,490 --> 00:02:55,050 and that would be the first part of my presentation. 23 00:02:55,050 --> 00:03:09,140 And in the second part, I'm going to discuss again part of my argument why equity is part of international law today. 24 00:03:09,140 --> 00:03:18,320 So I start with what equities, what we understand by equity. 25 00:03:18,320 --> 00:03:25,460 Many definitions have been given so different authors have said any of the following things equity 26 00:03:25,460 --> 00:03:32,750 is that which is fair and equitable or fair and reasonable in the administration of Justice. 27 00:03:32,750 --> 00:03:39,230 It is the installation of reasonableness and good faith in legal relations. 28 00:03:39,230 --> 00:03:50,510 It is an attribute of a developed legal system and agent of legal change and an element in the progressive development of international law. 29 00:03:50,510 --> 00:03:56,570 I like particularly these last two elements an agent of legal change and an element 30 00:03:56,570 --> 00:04:01,550 in the progressive development of international law is descriptions of equity, 31 00:04:01,550 --> 00:04:06,260 and I'm going to come back due to these bonds. 32 00:04:06,260 --> 00:04:13,100 A direct emanation of the idea of justice is what the Court of Justice, the International Court of Justice, 33 00:04:13,100 --> 00:04:21,590 said about equity, which is a direct emanation of the idea of justice. Equity requires a balancing of competing interests. 34 00:04:21,590 --> 00:04:31,280 It encompasses a body of legal principles designed to critique the law and to encourage fairness in international relations. 35 00:04:31,280 --> 00:04:39,860 It is what is just and fair an element of law that Asha's ethical values into the legal norms. 36 00:04:39,860 --> 00:04:45,110 It is justice normatively expressed as law. 37 00:04:45,110 --> 00:04:56,480 These are just some of the the definitions or descriptions of equity that have been given, and equity can be all that. 38 00:04:56,480 --> 00:05:06,830 And yet none of these descriptions, or almost none, captures the essence of what equity is because equity is so many things, 39 00:05:06,830 --> 00:05:12,440 and even some of these definitions are contradictory between them. 40 00:05:12,440 --> 00:05:18,140 So, for example, to say that equity is an element that critiques the law is, of course, 41 00:05:18,140 --> 00:05:23,900 something that goes contrary to to my argument that equity is part of the law. 42 00:05:23,900 --> 00:05:30,240 And yet there are instances where equity can have a corrective function. 43 00:05:30,240 --> 00:05:38,120 And so I think we need to move beyond the, you know, trying to give a definition of equity, 44 00:05:38,120 --> 00:05:51,380 and we should focus rather on on the content of equity, on the function of functions of equity and what equity does and what it can do. 45 00:05:51,380 --> 00:06:01,850 Now, in part because of the uncertainty that surrounds equity, its use has generally been accompanied by statements of caution. 46 00:06:01,850 --> 00:06:08,960 We have a fear of judicial discretion being exercised at the expense of legal certainty. 47 00:06:08,960 --> 00:06:21,620 And this has made international judges and arbitrators wary about invoking equity too often, at least outside the context of a maritime boundary. 48 00:06:21,620 --> 00:06:29,630 Limitations where it has become traditional eye, so to speak, to actually invoke equity. 49 00:06:29,630 --> 00:06:36,890 But generally, judges and arbitrators, especially judges, when they invoke equity, 50 00:06:36,890 --> 00:06:46,300 there are pains to stress that, in fact, they're applying equity within the law. 51 00:06:46,300 --> 00:06:58,600 I would like to to move on with the description of equity and give an example of a particular type of equity corrective equity. 52 00:06:58,600 --> 00:07:06,400 And for this, I need you to go to Aristotle and mention a quote, 53 00:07:06,400 --> 00:07:15,010 something that Aristotle said and which gives a good example of how equity can can work. 54 00:07:15,010 --> 00:07:26,680 So knowing that this is not again, this is a description of part of what equity I can do. 55 00:07:26,680 --> 00:07:35,140 So Aristotle said when the Legislature passes a law, this law is general in nature. 56 00:07:35,140 --> 00:07:42,160 And so when the law makes a universal statement and a particular case arises, 57 00:07:42,160 --> 00:07:49,510 it falls outside this statement, it is appropriate to correct the legislators omission or error, 58 00:07:49,510 --> 00:07:56,710 omission or error that were due to the generality of they are the legal norm by acting 59 00:07:56,710 --> 00:08:04,420 as the legislator would have acted if the legislator were present and had known. 60 00:08:04,420 --> 00:08:14,440 So this is a description of a particular type of equity, corrective equity or corrective justice equity as corrective justice. 61 00:08:14,440 --> 00:08:25,660 And of course, immediately it reveals all these concerns that we tend to have about equity that I don't 62 00:08:25,660 --> 00:08:33,040 know the judges and arbitrators may be replacing the legislator or in international law. 63 00:08:33,040 --> 00:08:38,440 Really, they, you know, states and treaty parties. 64 00:08:38,440 --> 00:08:47,840 And yet equity is all about. The application of an application interpretation of law in. 65 00:08:47,840 --> 00:08:58,580 Well, having regard to the specific circumstances of a case, and today I will be using a lot, ancient authors show. 66 00:08:58,580 --> 00:09:03,860 I will continue with an example from from Cicero. 67 00:09:03,860 --> 00:09:11,090 So disgusting. Zoom used to my new area. 68 00:09:11,090 --> 00:09:20,180 Cicero gave the example of a truce called between Sparta and Argus for a number of days, 69 00:09:20,180 --> 00:09:27,650 so they truce specified that it would last for a number of days. 70 00:09:27,650 --> 00:09:40,430 So they the Spartan King, ambushed the archives by night and the Spartans killed some and the took others as prisoners. 71 00:09:40,430 --> 00:09:48,710 And so when his disgruntled enemies confronted him with a reproach that he had breached his oath, 72 00:09:48,710 --> 00:09:58,510 he said that in fact, he had never agreed not to attacked by night since the truce stipulated days. 73 00:09:58,510 --> 00:10:05,380 And so this is an example of how, again, it's an example that Cicero brings. 74 00:10:05,380 --> 00:10:13,900 And it's an example of how equity action could function in a corrective manner by, you know, 75 00:10:13,900 --> 00:10:27,610 if we try to apply what Aristotle said by saying that while the truths stipulated days, the truth would last for X number of days. 76 00:10:27,610 --> 00:10:42,400 But in fact, if the if, if same, the treaty bodies had known that such an interpretation might be put upon this clause by by the Spartans, 77 00:10:42,400 --> 00:10:55,870 they would probably have included days and nights because clearly the the truce was meant to not only last during the day, but also during the night. 78 00:10:55,870 --> 00:11:04,300 And it could arrive, of course, at the same result by a symbol good faith interpretation of the truce. 79 00:11:04,300 --> 00:11:13,700 And as I may have the time to to explain later, good faith for me is also an equitable principle. 80 00:11:13,700 --> 00:11:24,390 Good faith itself is a manifestation of equity. Right, so I'm. 81 00:11:24,390 --> 00:11:32,640 We do have, though, problems accepting equity as part of the law. 82 00:11:32,640 --> 00:11:44,520 I do hope that the example that I gave shows that the application of even corrective equity and need not be something that scared me, 83 00:11:44,520 --> 00:11:51,960 that, you know, in this case, it would follow the, you know, a good faith interpretation of the of the terms of the truce. 84 00:11:51,960 --> 00:12:00,270 And one would meet any white to interpret a treaty in good faith in accordance with the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. 85 00:12:00,270 --> 00:12:08,100 And equity has to look at the specific circumstances of the case. 86 00:12:08,100 --> 00:12:21,170 So. With this, I hope I have given a general idea of what what equity is, again, my purpose here is not to be comprehensive. 87 00:12:21,170 --> 00:12:23,810 This is what I try to do in the book. 88 00:12:23,810 --> 00:12:34,500 But now I'm just raising some elements that I can hope can create a discussion, can lead to discussion and create a debate. 89 00:12:34,500 --> 00:12:40,590 But equity is generally seen as being something outside, 90 00:12:40,590 --> 00:12:49,890 most of you will probably know we have this traditional distinction of equity in relation to equity within the low equity pret a leg. 91 00:12:49,890 --> 00:12:56,760 So equity that exists alongside the love that fills the gaps that exist in the law and equity contract. 92 00:12:56,760 --> 00:13:10,830 And in fact, this is a very useful Harry Stick device, but it is also something that in the book I have addressed in in in one chapter, 93 00:13:10,830 --> 00:13:22,740 this traditional distinction of equity and it is something that I have rejected because I think that equity can ever exist, really. 94 00:13:22,740 --> 00:13:33,360 It is a contradiction to to discuss of inequity that contradicts the law and what it can do is contradict the letter of the law. 95 00:13:33,360 --> 00:13:44,100 For instance, when we have a a technological interpretation and the interpretation may at the end contradict the letter of the law, 96 00:13:44,100 --> 00:13:53,970 but it does not that equity does not and does not go against the law itself. 97 00:13:53,970 --> 00:14:04,490 She's. One of the reasons besides what I mentioned, that's why we're afraid of equity, and I mentioned this, 98 00:14:04,490 --> 00:14:16,490 this fear of the fact that we see equity is something that can lead to a judicial discretion that that ends up not respecting a treaty. 99 00:14:16,490 --> 00:14:31,880 Terms that is seen as very much something subjective is also that it's also this idea that equity is something that belongs to natural law, 100 00:14:31,880 --> 00:14:42,020 whatever that is. I think that this this fear is actually exaggerated. 101 00:14:42,020 --> 00:14:49,060 And. For one thing, 102 00:14:49,060 --> 00:14:55,210 I think we need to to move beyond this idea that at the judge of the arbitrator 103 00:14:55,210 --> 00:15:00,970 invokes or applies equity when they mention when we use the words equity, 104 00:15:00,970 --> 00:15:07,450 when they use the word equitable. So I think that the judge was the arbitrator in order to apply. 105 00:15:07,450 --> 00:15:13,660 Equity does not have to to use the terms equity and that it is wrong to to only 106 00:15:13,660 --> 00:15:24,220 look for equity when when the very word is used in a judicial decision and so on. 107 00:15:24,220 --> 00:15:32,290 So we have many equitable principles and I will give you some some examples. 108 00:15:32,290 --> 00:15:38,650 So we have I already mentioned good faith. Good faith is an equitable principle. 109 00:15:38,650 --> 00:15:45,850 We have a stockpile. We have a quiescence of clean hands doctrine and so on. 110 00:15:45,850 --> 00:15:52,060 And this is just to give an example of the fact that we have these principles that are equitable 111 00:15:52,060 --> 00:16:01,240 principles and that are being used every day by international judges and arbitrators. 112 00:16:01,240 --> 00:16:09,760 And without batting and not now, so to speak. And these are the end of the day applications of equity. 113 00:16:09,760 --> 00:16:20,380 So the judge or the arbitrator does not need to to invoke equity human rights themselves at all. 114 00:16:20,380 --> 00:16:25,760 They they derive from equity. Human rights come from equity. 115 00:16:25,760 --> 00:16:37,760 And so when we have one of these, when these principles stop all acquiescence, good faith are obliged, we don't necessarily see what they could. 116 00:16:37,760 --> 00:16:51,310 I think most likely we don't. I think of equity, which is that there are so well-established in international law that. 117 00:16:51,310 --> 00:17:03,020 If we see them as something autonomous rather than as forming part of an abstract concept of. 118 00:17:03,020 --> 00:17:08,000 Of course, there is also an extra legal concept of equity. 119 00:17:08,000 --> 00:17:16,370 We have equity in philosophy, we have equity in, I don't know, even religion, equity in morals. 120 00:17:16,370 --> 00:17:24,170 But my argument is that the legal concept of equity equity as we resort to it in 121 00:17:24,170 --> 00:17:29,390 international law as it is resorted to by international courts and tribunals. 122 00:17:29,390 --> 00:17:44,650 This concept is part of international law and I think one of the ways in which we can can better understand. 123 00:17:44,650 --> 00:17:56,590 Why, for one thing, we may think that equity is not part of international law and also a way of understanding at the same time, 124 00:17:56,590 --> 00:18:07,030 why equities is part of international law, according to my argument, at least, is to consider the history of the evolution of equity. 125 00:18:07,030 --> 00:18:17,100 So I think that. Part of the reason why equities sometimes seen as something that is outside the norm, 126 00:18:17,100 --> 00:18:25,680 something that contradicts the law and by the same token is something that sometimes needs to be feared. 127 00:18:25,680 --> 00:18:34,080 Comes from the division of equity in common law systems, the division between equity and and the Commonwealth. 128 00:18:34,080 --> 00:18:41,160 And I think for this reason, it is interesting to consider the history of the evolution of equity in this way, I said at the beginning. 129 00:18:41,160 --> 00:18:47,790 I will be referring a lot to to to ancient times today. 130 00:18:47,790 --> 00:19:01,710 And so I would like to take us back to two Roman law to consider the evolution of equity in in a very broad manner from then to out today. 131 00:19:01,710 --> 00:19:08,540 So. In Roman Times. 132 00:19:08,540 --> 00:19:23,570 The equity it was expressed in Roman, a praetorian law Roman pictorial law was made by the Praytor, who was a magistrate, and so upon taking office, 133 00:19:23,570 --> 00:19:32,420 they prayed you would would issue an edict introducing the actions and remedies that you would accept, 134 00:19:32,420 --> 00:19:37,220 and he would also announce the principles that would guide his actions. 135 00:19:37,220 --> 00:19:48,140 So this was a system that would be in parallel to the use similar and the use of, of course, has given its name to two civil law. 136 00:19:48,140 --> 00:19:52,670 But at the same time, it can also be seen as an equivalent of the common rule. 137 00:19:52,670 --> 00:19:59,360 So in Roman times, we have this development of two separate systems. 138 00:19:59,360 --> 00:20:05,420 I want the use civil. They again, for the sake of simplicity, the common law, let's say. 139 00:20:05,420 --> 00:20:14,150 And them they use spray two-room, which is this law made by the preachers. 140 00:20:14,150 --> 00:20:22,250 So Praetorian edict would normally be valid for one year, but they tended to be renewed from one year to the next. 141 00:20:22,250 --> 00:20:36,650 And the new apparatus would tend to add to the the actions and remedies that their predecessors would have already created. 142 00:20:36,650 --> 00:20:51,900 Preacher in law was intended to soften the rigidity of the use of law, which was a combination of statutory and customary law and. 143 00:20:51,900 --> 00:20:57,410 As time went on. The role is greater and more diminished. 144 00:20:57,410 --> 00:21:01,580 And during the reign of the Emperor Hadrian, there was a codification. 145 00:21:01,580 --> 00:21:13,440 We had the Julian codification and with the codification, the division between the U.S. and the U.S. Praetorian and it. 146 00:21:13,440 --> 00:21:19,470 And I would like to to remind you of a I in certain ways, 147 00:21:19,470 --> 00:21:30,840 similar development that happened with the distinct strains of equity and the common law in the 18th century in common law systems. 148 00:21:30,840 --> 00:21:36,000 And so with a codification, with the a codification, 149 00:21:36,000 --> 00:21:45,870 the distinction between the use of Villa and the the equitable law the Pretoria law ended and 150 00:21:45,870 --> 00:21:53,280 the equitable principles that underlay the praetorian edicts were subsumed in the codification. 151 00:21:53,280 --> 00:22:10,190 So equity what was seen as a separate remedy, as a separate right, as an equitable remedy and an equitable right became part of the Harvard law and. 152 00:22:10,190 --> 00:22:16,970 It's generally. Sorry. 153 00:22:16,970 --> 00:22:30,870 So we have a number of Roman equitable remedies that are actually part of international law acting today, I will give you three examples. 154 00:22:30,870 --> 00:22:38,130 The equitable Roman remedy of the verdict, which corresponds to the English Channel tres injunction, 155 00:22:38,130 --> 00:22:44,430 is reflected in the ability today of international courts and tribunals to order provisional 156 00:22:44,430 --> 00:22:54,000 measures when an international court or tribunal issues orders provisional measures. 157 00:22:54,000 --> 00:23:00,000 Do we think that this is an application of equity? No, we don't. 158 00:23:00,000 --> 00:23:05,400 And this is so commonplace and yet. 159 00:23:05,400 --> 00:23:13,590 These provisional measures started as an equitable remedy. 160 00:23:13,590 --> 00:23:24,150 Another example, the equitable Roman remedy of restitution intergroup is part of the contemporary law on state responsibility, 161 00:23:24,150 --> 00:23:27,660 and we have even kept the Roman name. 162 00:23:27,660 --> 00:23:40,090 So these remedies so way rooted in international law in the international law mainstream that we no longer perceive them as manifestations of equity. 163 00:23:40,090 --> 00:23:50,890 And the impact of Roman equitable rights, such as lashes, acquiescence, estoppel are also parallel this development. 164 00:23:50,890 --> 00:24:07,390 And so this is another way in which international law has incorporated equity or equity has become a part of the hard law of today. 165 00:24:07,390 --> 00:24:17,040 And of course, what happened in Bali? What happened later was that in civil law systems. 166 00:24:17,040 --> 00:24:33,710 If it were, we were inspired by the Julian Codification equity became part of the legal norms and so the the court systems themselves included equity. 167 00:24:33,710 --> 00:24:38,870 Of course, this is not what happened in common law jurisdictions. 168 00:24:38,870 --> 00:24:53,000 So I realise we have a we have a mixed group of people today and probably not everyone is familiar with with some English. 169 00:24:53,000 --> 00:24:55,520 English law and equity in English law. 170 00:24:55,520 --> 00:25:08,990 So I will just very briefly give you an overview of how equity came to actually be and function a number in English law. 171 00:25:08,990 --> 00:25:16,820 So the chancellor, who was a member of the Kings Council, was involved in the Administration of Justice. 172 00:25:16,820 --> 00:25:25,370 And one of them was when someone needed to commence an action in the common law courts. 173 00:25:25,370 --> 00:25:29,210 It was necessary to obtain a royal writ. 174 00:25:29,210 --> 00:25:40,700 The royal writ was issued by the Office of the Chancellor and from the middle of the 14th century, there was an attempt to to reign the chancellor in. 175 00:25:40,700 --> 00:25:43,880 And so too, to limit the chancellor's power. 176 00:25:43,880 --> 00:25:52,400 And so the chancellor could no longer award new reach for the common law courts unless a king and council had consented. 177 00:25:52,400 --> 00:25:57,740 And so in order to bypass this limitation on his power, 178 00:25:57,740 --> 00:26:06,050 the chancellor essentially decided to act to keep the petitioners requests within his chancery. 179 00:26:06,050 --> 00:26:12,420 And so he started to develop these equitable remedies and actions. 180 00:26:12,420 --> 00:26:21,120 And the petitions that such known as bills were initially addressed to the King. 181 00:26:21,120 --> 00:26:24,630 Then they started to be addressed to the chancellor. 182 00:26:24,630 --> 00:26:34,470 And so this lady created sorry led to the creation of the first the establishment of the first equity courts in the middle of the 14th century. 183 00:26:34,470 --> 00:26:41,640 And by that time, the common law had lost its flexibility owing to the strict, 184 00:26:41,640 --> 00:26:53,380 strictly formulated rules and possibly especially by the way, at the hardening effect of binding precedent. 185 00:26:53,380 --> 00:27:04,980 And so it was necessary to have this a parallel system that would introduce some flexibility due to the legal system. 186 00:27:04,980 --> 00:27:12,240 And so equity developed as an alternative jurisdiction, very much like in Roman law, 187 00:27:12,240 --> 00:27:20,670 in order to furnish relief to those who did not have an adequate remedy at Commonwealth. 188 00:27:20,670 --> 00:27:32,210 And so. Of course, later, more recently in the 18th century, the medium 18 had roots in the United States a little later in England. 189 00:27:32,210 --> 00:27:39,590 If I remember the dates correctly, the two systems became merged, the common law and equity. 190 00:27:39,590 --> 00:27:47,480 But I think this centuries old distinction has to some extent led to this perception. 191 00:27:47,480 --> 00:27:56,480 This perception, which is which is not limited to two to common law systems, but also as civil lawyers may. 192 00:27:56,480 --> 00:27:59,270 Things like that is there is no clear distinction, I think, 193 00:27:59,270 --> 00:28:08,730 between how common law is worth seeing and how civil lawyers will think about equity and equity's relationship due to law. 194 00:28:08,730 --> 00:28:23,270 And so I think this centuries old division between equity and the common law has led to this perception has carried over into international law, 195 00:28:23,270 --> 00:28:36,920 and many will now see equity as something that is that stands outside the law, something that is inferior to international law. 196 00:28:36,920 --> 00:28:54,080 And I think it is important to to consider as this development of equity, and it is important to separate exceptions from from the content of equity. 197 00:28:54,080 --> 00:28:59,000 Of course, you can tell me that I come from a common story. I come, I don't come from a common home jurisdiction. 198 00:28:59,000 --> 00:29:06,230 I come from a civil law jurisdiction. And maybe this is why I think the way I do this is a possibility. 199 00:29:06,230 --> 00:29:14,890 But I do think that this is something that doesn't ultimately have to do with 200 00:29:14,890 --> 00:29:18,920 whether one comes from a common law jurisdiction or a civil or jurisdiction. 201 00:29:18,920 --> 00:29:31,310 Because when we look at the international scholarly writings, we see that common lawyers thing may think that equity is part of international law, 202 00:29:31,310 --> 00:29:38,480 and we have civil lawyers who who may think that equity in law are separate. 203 00:29:38,480 --> 00:29:44,630 I was just trying to say that I think that the the distinction the division between equity 204 00:29:44,630 --> 00:29:50,420 and the common law is something which somehow has trickled in to international law. 205 00:29:50,420 --> 00:30:08,810 And there is a persistent perception amongst some international lawyers that equity is in fact something that's a separate from. 206 00:30:08,810 --> 00:30:28,400 And. I think that I feel that I see that I still have more time, but I'm drawing to a close, so in a few minutes, not, not yet. 207 00:30:28,400 --> 00:30:32,390 Again, this is this is part of my argument, 208 00:30:32,390 --> 00:30:42,500 why equity is part of international equity is continuously a continually incorporated in law and what in the past 209 00:30:42,500 --> 00:30:54,710 were equitable innovations that could create fear and resentment that could appear to be something outside the law. 210 00:30:54,710 --> 00:31:10,190 In fact, today formed part and parcel of international law and provisional measures and restitution and degree are only two examples of that. 211 00:31:10,190 --> 00:31:13,970 Again, estoppel, acquiescence, clean hands, good faith. 212 00:31:13,970 --> 00:31:19,460 We can think of other principles that are more or less recognised proportionality. 213 00:31:19,460 --> 00:31:25,040 For example, again, another another equitable principle. 214 00:31:25,040 --> 00:31:30,050 And again, when international judges and arbitrators apply them. 215 00:31:30,050 --> 00:31:41,510 We don't think of equity, but equities, their equities actually is the foundation of these principles. 216 00:31:41,510 --> 00:31:46,190 And I would just like to stress that this is only in the book. 217 00:31:46,190 --> 00:31:52,610 This is only one small part of my argument as to why equity is part of international law. 218 00:31:52,610 --> 00:31:59,930 So, for instance, I consider whether equities can be seen as a source of international law in light of 219 00:31:59,930 --> 00:32:06,980 Article 38 of the statute of the International Court of Justice and what type of source. 220 00:32:06,980 --> 00:32:17,510 And I respond to this in the positive. But this is this is for a whole different discussion. 221 00:32:17,510 --> 00:32:29,600 So I will I will close with some final remarks, and that is that equity is continuously incorporated in international law. 222 00:32:29,600 --> 00:32:38,480 I've already said this, but I would like to add that. And as equities incorporated in international law, it tends to harden. 223 00:32:38,480 --> 00:32:47,060 So one can ask, OK? Provisional measures were an equitable remedy when they were invented for the first time. 224 00:32:47,060 --> 00:32:54,920 Are they still a manifestation of equity? I mean, they originate in equity, but do they, you know, 225 00:32:54,920 --> 00:33:04,220 is is our perception of equity today such that it encompasses provisional measures are all provisional 226 00:33:04,220 --> 00:33:13,030 measures are not really equitable because some because we don't perceive them as a is a function of equity. 227 00:33:13,030 --> 00:33:20,020 Because it's something that that has hardened into law and it is no longer flexible in a way. 228 00:33:20,020 --> 00:33:26,470 It depends on the procedural rules. And of course, maybe it's not a very good example. 229 00:33:26,470 --> 00:33:36,790 In fact, because provisional measures tend to be in international court or tribunal can order provisional measures when it considers 230 00:33:36,790 --> 00:33:47,560 that the circumstances require the imposition of such measures and or when we're looking at the particular circumstances. 231 00:33:47,560 --> 00:33:58,790 We are very often considering equity. So equity is this the the consideration of the specific circumstances they taking into account 232 00:33:58,790 --> 00:34:07,360 of the particular circumstances is something which I can point to an application of equity. 233 00:34:07,360 --> 00:34:17,980 And so equity incorporated in law hardens. And that means that there is a need for a new need for equity continuously. 234 00:34:17,980 --> 00:34:30,930 So they, you know, this work of incorporating equity into the law, a new equity into the law is not finished. 235 00:34:30,930 --> 00:34:36,660 And I will close with a quote from Roscoe Pound. 236 00:34:36,660 --> 00:34:47,200 He wrote many, many years ago that law is stable yet cannot stand still. 237 00:34:47,200 --> 00:34:57,820 Laws need to change, society evolves, our ethics rules and law needs to change and society changes, 238 00:34:57,820 --> 00:35:05,890 and equity is an element that helps law evolve and help slow develop. 239 00:35:05,890 --> 00:35:14,100 And it is allowing ultimately between what the law was in the past and to what the law is going to be tomorrow. 240 00:35:14,100 --> 00:35:16,286 Thank you very much.