CYIL 2014

496

TOMÁŠ LIPTÁK

CYIL 5 ȍ2014Ȏ

In the second chapter Pavel Šturma presents

ad hoc

international compensation

mechanisms which are publicly less known. The chapter presents historical grounds

which gave rise to a plethora of different indemnification mechanisms in the

international public law. For further clarity three theoretical categories of reparation

mechanisms are introduced: mechanisms founded on the grounds of international

agreements, mechanisms created by an act of an international organisation and

indemnification mechanisms of a hybrid nature. A conclusion is provided emphasizing

ad hoc

nature, which does not allow for proper discussion about general customary

rules on indemnification.

In another chapter Vladimír Balaš gives an account of the valuation of compensation

for expropriated property of foreign investors. Promotion and protection of foreign

investment has skyrocketed in the last twenty years and a vast body of case law exists

concerning improper interference with the property of foreign investors. One of these

aspects discussed in the text is methods of valuation of property that allow for calculation

of compensation for a foreign investor wronged. Basic rules of valuation of property

expropriated by the host states are given, and other accounting and auditing methods

which can be used for proper estimation of foreign investor’s property. There is

a compelling remark about the lack of rules on compensation in international

investment treaties in comparison to the substantial compensation given to investors

for expropriated property in the host state.

Indemnification in the context of fighting terrorism and peace operations

Veronika Bílková introduces the reader to the reparation of victims of terrorism

at an international level. The first part presents the starting point and contemporary

trend of universal and regional European international legal instruments regulating

compensation for victims. The presentation of theoretical approaches, i.e. the broader

universal approach or the more restrictive European approach, is stimulating. The

second, analytical part puts emphasis on defining the victim of terrorism and on

questions what sort of reparation can be obtained for victims or what the proper

amount of compensation is.

Another chapter by Denisa Žilová concerns the specific compensation of victims

of terrorism in the

Lockerbie case

and provides the reader with a comparison of

compensation regimes created by United States, Israel or Great Britain. The chapter

differentiates between the national compensation mechanisms of Great Britain and

Israel based on the experience of those states in armed conflict and on the other

compensation mechanism of the United States which provides narrower compensation

options for victims.

A topic contributed by Department member Martin Faix and Šárka Ošťádalová

clarifies reparation for wrongful acts committed during UN, EU and NATO peace

operations. The thesis of this chapter is that one element of the success of peace

operations is good relations with local communities. This can be accomplished by

reparation mechanisms for damages done by execution of peace operations. On the