
doi: 10.1017/amp.2017.52
The papers presented on this panel so far explore how countries and courts have worked around jurisdictional lacunae in international law. This last paper considers the question of jurisdiction from the other side: How should judges handle jurisdictional excess? While jurisdictional gaps can create governance problems, exorbitant claims of jurisdiction can make the cooperation and reciprocity needed to solve those governance problems harder to achieve. And if finding the right balance between ensuring adequate jurisdiction and avoiding exorbitant jurisdiction were not hard enough, much of that balancing is left up to individual judges deciding individual cases in domestic courts. Private international law is, in this sense, a decentralized system that depends on ad hoc calibration by dispersed judges.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
