Maritime conflict management is the regulation of conflict in relation to the sea. It comprises conflict enforcement, conflict resolution and conflict avoidance. How did victims of maritime... Show moreMaritime conflict management is the regulation of conflict in relation to the sea. It comprises conflict enforcement, conflict resolution and conflict avoidance. How did victims of maritime conflicts claim and obtain damages or demand compensation or reparation? The articles in this issue aim to shed light on this question from two distinct yet related perspectives: that of the aggressor and the victim, on the one hand, and that of the political entities to which they belonged, on the other. The articles, covering seven centuries, reveal connections and entanglements between private parties and public authorities, demonstrating the importance of both for the development of maritime conflict management. Taken together these contributions provide evidence for the gradual development of maritime conflict management, diplomacy and norms for international law. Show less
Suriname was one of the most emblematic slave societies of the Atlantic world and saw a court system in which a Governing Council functioned simultaneously as political council to the governor, as... Show moreSuriname was one of the most emblematic slave societies of the Atlantic world and saw a court system in which a Governing Council functioned simultaneously as political council to the governor, as a criminal court and also elected the Civil Court. Studies of the practice of the Governing Council have been limited to a small number of spectacularly brutal cases canonised by abolitionist campaigners. This article reconstructs how various forums for arbitration related to the Governing Council, and how this relationship changed by comparing its practices across the long eighteenth century. I conclude that the Governing Council interacted with several forums, both formally recognised as well as informal, in the colony. Over time, adjudication became increasingly dependent on the authority of the Governing Council. The combination of the political and legal roles contributed to the process of colonial state formation in Suriname. Studies of the practices of similar courts will clarify how the Dutch Empire successfully governed its diverse populations. Show less
This article discusses how merchants or skippers suffering losses aimed to get redress for damages in trading and shipping from or with Holland and Zeeland in the fourteenth and early fifteenth... Show moreThis article discusses how merchants or skippers suffering losses aimed to get redress for damages in trading and shipping from or with Holland and Zeeland in the fourteenth and early fifteenth century within the context of Anglo– Dutch trade and diplomacy. In accordance with legal doctrine both the English king and the Count of Holland considered reprisal as an ultimate remedy. Both rulers used the possibility of reprisal as a means of pressure within Anglo–Dutch diplomacy. Their willingness to support their subjects went beyond the issue of damage redress as it also enabled them to have more control over their subjects. When reprisal was eventually issued, rulers on both sides of the Channel carefully supervised and controlled its procedures. Even though rulers were prepared to support victims via diplomacy and, ultimately, reprisal, they did consider individual interests in the functioning of the wider political and economic interests of their countries. Show less
Throughout the Great War, the Netherlands tried frantically to remain a neutral nation between the warring Central Powers and the Entente Forces. Notwithstanding its neutrality, the war left... Show moreThroughout the Great War, the Netherlands tried frantically to remain a neutral nation between the warring Central Powers and the Entente Forces. Notwithstanding its neutrality, the war left distinct marks on Dutch society and economy. This article argues that it also left marks, both temporary and lasting, on Dutch contract law. Never since the introduction of the Dutch Civil Code in 1838 had the Netherlands been exposed to such a disruptive international conflict as the Great War. Therefore, the war presented the first systemic test of Civil Code doctrines such as impossibility and force majeure. As far as these doctrines are concerned, some have argued that the Great War was no different from other, less disruptive economic events. However, on closer inspection one may find that the application of private law doctrines under war conditions seemed to reflect the Dutch neutrality doctrine. The courts strictly construed and enforced contracts, mostly rejected defences involving 'impossibility' and vis maior, and often held that contracting parties had knowingly assumed the risks associated with contracting during a war. Moreover, the Great War marked the end of nineteenth-century laissez-faire notions in regulatory policies, which in turn caused a gradual shift in balance between public law and freedom of contract. In hindsight, the war can also be regarded as the turning point in Dutch doctrinal thinking on the respective roles of and the relationship between force majeure, unforeseen circumstances and good faith. Another way of looking at judicial application of contract law during the Great War is to consider this as an extension of the Dutch neutrality doctrine. Both viewpoints are explored in this article. Show less
