Talk:Public International Law/Methodology/Case Analysis

Review 20 May 2023
Dear Max,

Thank you so much for writing this great chapter! I wish such a concise and easy to understand guide with ample sources would have existed when I was a student. I agree with Raffaela on switching the Approaches and Methodology parts, as we already discussed, and also on the general suggestion of using less 'hierarchical' language. Here are some extra pointers on what you could include in the part on engaging critically with cases:
 * The 'feminist judgments' movement rewrites existing cases from a feminist perspective. Here is the collection of feminist judgments in international law and here is the introductory post of a blog symposium we had at Völkerrechtsblog on this project.
 * Ntina Tzouvala explains on pp. 9 et seq of 'Capitalism as Civilization' how she uses Bennett Capers' method of 'Reading Back, Reading Black'
 * 'Trashing' is another classical CLS method of analysing cases

Herzlich Sué González Hauck (discuss • contribs) 17:02, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Review 16 May 2023
Dear Max, This is a great chapter and I think it's extremely useful to have it in the book. I added some comments directly in the text. Some overall feedback/thoughts:

1) Since you refer a lot to critical approaches and the difference between critical/doctrinal and the students have not yet been introduced to these concepts, it might make sense to move the entire methodology section after the approaches section. 2) Please also bear in mind that in the sources chapter, we have an entire chapter on international and domestic decisions and their role. Maybe there is a need to coordinate with Lucas. Lima on this. 3) The "Übergang" from the general considerations to concrete/hands-on suggestions for students could be smoother. Maybe add in the intro part what exactly the aim is/that the aim is really to give practical advise for assignments etc.? 4) I find the language a bit too much "top down"; rather than saying students should etc., I would phrase it more inclusively and also more tempatively, addressing students directly "you might consider" etc. Also explain better why this makes sense because this makes it more understandable and convincing for students.

Best, Raffaela --Raffaela Kunz (discuss • contribs) 09:29, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Review, 27 August 2021: Jens
Hi Max,

I think the outline looks great so far and I continue to think this is a really cool and helpfully pragmatic chapter to include in the textbook.

I just wanted to highlight early on two aspects which stand out to me whenever I teach international law and especially international case-law:

1. The age of some of the judgments. Students from common law jurisdictions might be more used to this but in Germany it always raises some eyebrows and needs a little contextualisation.

2. More importantly: the difficulty many students have in approaching judgments critically. Again this may be different in other countries where legal education in general might be less doctrinal (and whenever I've taught students from other disciplines than law it's been less of an issue) but in my experience, students often take whatever a judgment says as given, struggle to identify internal contradictions or other problematic elements, and seem very reluctant to question judicial pronouncements in general. At least in my view, overcoming that reluctance is an important part of teaching case-law.

If you wanted to include either of these points, I don't think it would necessarily have to be reflected in the outline, e.g. the prior point probably fits nicely under "A. Relevance of Cases". For the latter point it might be a good option to include an additional subsection either under C.I. (since it relates to the role and objective of reading cases) or as C.II.4. (since critical assessment could be considered part of understanding the relevance of the case). But of course that's entirely up to you, I just figured I'd draw attention to the issue in case you agree that it's an important point to mention in this chapter.

(Hopefully this is the right place to leave the review, I'm still figuring out how things work on here...)

--Jens Theilen (discuss • contribs) 11:37, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Review: Walter
Dear Max, the chapter “Cases in Int Law” is a very engaging and practical contribution to the book. The structure is simple and is easy to understand the aim of the section, and the subtitles deepen the titles in a clear, connected way. I would only suggest this points: -I think consultative opinions should have a role in this section, sometimes they are referred as cases (under the notion of “case law”), and even if we know they are not contentious cases and their authority is different, they are largely used for the same reasons as cases: i.e to find the established law by a court. Maybe you can make a small entry about their nature below “2. Quasi-judicial Decisions”.


 * Below the section case analysis for moot courts, or mentioned somewhere along, should be the explanation of the key elements about using a case for litigation, even if mooters and students are our main goal, we wish some people to use this guide for litigation too, and that should present.
 * For some students is really hard at the beginning to understand that in international law a case can be like a 3 chapter movie (It has happened in ICJ, PCA, ICSID): a case is divided in a “case” or judgment for jurisdiction, a judgment for the merits and a judgment for reparations (is it the same case? Are they different cases? Are they stages of the same case?), that should be a point to teach. It might not appear in the index, but it totally should be explored in your teachings about how to do cases.
 * A group of concepts I use when I teach case analysis (distinguishing cases is a very good idea in your index) is to divide and analyze case law by the parties: are they interstate cases (ITLOS ICJ PCA)? Individual vs. State cases (ECTHR, IATCHR)? Investor vs State (ICSID UNCITRAL)? Prosecutor vs Individual cases (ICC)? This teaches a lot about who and why can have a case.
 * A very relevant and used source for case analysis is the separate opinions of judged involved in the case, they are common in international and domestic law and fundamental for the analysis of a decision, they should be included somehow.

Great index, is one of the most comprehensive ones I have seen in the project, I hope some of this mere suggestions help. Best. Walter Arévalo.

Summary: 1st Draft
In this first draft, I have attempted to write a first introduction to case analysis in international law and to incorporate the comments of Jens and Walter. My goal was to write a simple but useful introduction for students on how to deal with cases in international law. In the next step, I would like to resolve ambiguities and explain in more detail in some places. I am also considering whether it might be helpful for students to read how cases can be presented orally and in writing. Here, however, it is difficult for me to make general statements. I am very grateful for any hints and criticism!

--Max Milas (discuss • contribs) 17:15, 7 February 2022 (UTC)