Rethinking Jurisdiction

Research output: Contribution to conferenceAbstractResearch

Abstract

International law on jurisdiction is a quagmire of gaps, inconsistencies and exaggerated reliance on
outdated sources of law ill-equipped for modern society. The focus on the territorial vs
extraterritorial dichotomy is misguided and harmful, and the territoriality principle is not
appropriate as the jurisprudential foundation of jurisdiction.
This paper argues that the traditional categorisation of three types of jurisdiction needs to be
amended or reconsidered. It also advances an alternative jurisprudential framework for jurisdiction
– applicable for both public, and private, international law – consisting of three core principles.
Further, it brings attention to a selection of novel concepts, including: ‘jurisdictional
interoperability’, ‘bite’ vs. ‘bark’ jurisdiction, ‘scope of jurisdiction’, and ‘lagom jurisdiction’.
Original languageEnglish
Publication statusUnpublished - 9 Aug 2019
EventTechnology and Jurisdiction in Outer Space and Cyberspace Colloquium - Bond University, Gold Coast, Australia
Duration: 9 Aug 20199 Aug 2019
https://bond.edu.au/event/62256/technology-and-jurisdiction-outer-space-and-cyberspace-colloquium

Conference

ConferenceTechnology and Jurisdiction in Outer Space and Cyberspace Colloquium
CountryAustralia
CityGold Coast
Period9/08/199/08/19
Internet address

Fingerprint

jurisdiction
international law
source of law

Cite this

Svantesson, D. J. B. (2019). Rethinking Jurisdiction. Abstract from Technology and Jurisdiction in Outer Space and Cyberspace Colloquium, Gold Coast, Australia.
Svantesson, Dan Jerker B. / Rethinking Jurisdiction. Abstract from Technology and Jurisdiction in Outer Space and Cyberspace Colloquium, Gold Coast, Australia.
@conference{797ba68c275041f58458b52545ef4415,
title = "Rethinking Jurisdiction",
abstract = "International law on jurisdiction is a quagmire of gaps, inconsistencies and exaggerated reliance onoutdated sources of law ill-equipped for modern society. The focus on the territorial vsextraterritorial dichotomy is misguided and harmful, and the territoriality principle is notappropriate as the jurisprudential foundation of jurisdiction.This paper argues that the traditional categorisation of three types of jurisdiction needs to beamended or reconsidered. It also advances an alternative jurisprudential framework for jurisdiction– applicable for both public, and private, international law – consisting of three core principles.Further, it brings attention to a selection of novel concepts, including: ‘jurisdictionalinteroperability’, ‘bite’ vs. ‘bark’ jurisdiction, ‘scope of jurisdiction’, and ‘lagom jurisdiction’.",
author = "Svantesson, {Dan Jerker B}",
year = "2019",
month = "8",
day = "9",
language = "English",
note = "Technology and Jurisdiction in Outer Space and Cyberspace Colloquium ; Conference date: 09-08-2019 Through 09-08-2019",
url = "https://bond.edu.au/event/62256/technology-and-jurisdiction-outer-space-and-cyberspace-colloquium",

}

Svantesson, DJB 2019, 'Rethinking Jurisdiction' Technology and Jurisdiction in Outer Space and Cyberspace Colloquium, Gold Coast, Australia, 9/08/19 - 9/08/19, .

Rethinking Jurisdiction. / Svantesson, Dan Jerker B.

2019. Abstract from Technology and Jurisdiction in Outer Space and Cyberspace Colloquium, Gold Coast, Australia.

Research output: Contribution to conferenceAbstractResearch

TY - CONF

T1 - Rethinking Jurisdiction

AU - Svantesson, Dan Jerker B

PY - 2019/8/9

Y1 - 2019/8/9

N2 - International law on jurisdiction is a quagmire of gaps, inconsistencies and exaggerated reliance onoutdated sources of law ill-equipped for modern society. The focus on the territorial vsextraterritorial dichotomy is misguided and harmful, and the territoriality principle is notappropriate as the jurisprudential foundation of jurisdiction.This paper argues that the traditional categorisation of three types of jurisdiction needs to beamended or reconsidered. It also advances an alternative jurisprudential framework for jurisdiction– applicable for both public, and private, international law – consisting of three core principles.Further, it brings attention to a selection of novel concepts, including: ‘jurisdictionalinteroperability’, ‘bite’ vs. ‘bark’ jurisdiction, ‘scope of jurisdiction’, and ‘lagom jurisdiction’.

AB - International law on jurisdiction is a quagmire of gaps, inconsistencies and exaggerated reliance onoutdated sources of law ill-equipped for modern society. The focus on the territorial vsextraterritorial dichotomy is misguided and harmful, and the territoriality principle is notappropriate as the jurisprudential foundation of jurisdiction.This paper argues that the traditional categorisation of three types of jurisdiction needs to beamended or reconsidered. It also advances an alternative jurisprudential framework for jurisdiction– applicable for both public, and private, international law – consisting of three core principles.Further, it brings attention to a selection of novel concepts, including: ‘jurisdictionalinteroperability’, ‘bite’ vs. ‘bark’ jurisdiction, ‘scope of jurisdiction’, and ‘lagom jurisdiction’.

M3 - Abstract

ER -

Svantesson DJB. Rethinking Jurisdiction. 2019. Abstract from Technology and Jurisdiction in Outer Space and Cyberspace Colloquium, Gold Coast, Australia.