Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
OXFORD LAW ONLINE
STYLE, CITATION, AND TEMPLATE GUIDE
PART 1: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... 3
1 Introduction ....................................................................................... 3
1.1
Oxford Law online........................................................................... 3
1.2
Aims of this document...................................................................... 3
1.3
To comment on this document ............................................................ 4
2 Oxford Law online editorial style .............................................................. 4
2.1
House style in an online context .......................................................... 4
2.2
Consistent style across all Oxford Law online services ................................ 4
3 Writing for online publication .................................................................. 5
3.1
Design the content for online publication ............................................... 5
3.2
Write discrete, concise, highly structured text ........................................ 5
3.3
Support users with different interest levels ............................................ 5
3.4
Aim for the hallmarks of strong writing ................................................. 5
4 Acceptable language ............................................................................. 5
4.1
Clear, concise, and logical................................................................. 5
4.2
Avoid parochial references ................................................................ 6
4.3
Avoid offensive language .................................................................. 6
4.4
Use the past tense .......................................................................... 6
PART 2: STYLE GUIDE .................................................................................. 7
5 British style ........................................................................................ 7
6 Spelling and hyphenation........................................................................ 7
7 Punctuating text .................................................................................. 7
8 Quotations ......................................................................................... 7
8.1
Quotation marks............................................................................. 7
8.2
Displayed quotations ....................................................................... 7
8.3
Quoting verbatim ........................................................................... 8
8.4
Punctuating quotations..................................................................... 8
8.5
Omissions from quotations................................................................. 8
9 Capitalization ..................................................................................... 8
10 Italics ............................................................................................... 8
11 Numbers ........................................................................................... 9
11.1
Words and figures ........................................................................ 9
11.2
Number Ranges ........................................................................... 9
12 Dates ............................................................................................... 9
13 Abbreviations ..................................................................................... 9
13.1
Define abbreviations ..................................................................... 9
13.2
No full points in abbreviations ........................................................10
13.3
Months of the year ......................................................................10
14 Attributions to judges...........................................................................10
15 Links to other Internet websites ..............................................................10
16 Names of countries and other jurisdictions..................................................10
17 Foreign names ...................................................................................11
18 Description of the parties ......................................................................11
PART 3: CITATION GUIDE ............................................................................12
19 Introduction ......................................................................................12
20 Oxford Law Citator ..............................................................................12
20.1
Marking citations for the Oxford Law Citator .......................................12
-1-
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
20.1.1 Asterisks .....................................................................................13
20.1.2 Underlining .................................................................................13
20.2 Link Types......................................................................................14
21 Formulating a full case citation ...............................................................15
21.1
Party Names, Re, Ex Parte, etc .......................................................15
21.2
Anonymous and non-existent party names ..........................................16
21.3
Procedural stages in the citation .....................................................16
22 Incomplete and uncertain citations: [need full cite] and [review cite] .................16
23 When to use full and abbreviated citations .................................................16
23.1
First mention .............................................................................16
23.2
Repeated mentions .....................................................................16
23.2.2 Excluding references ......................................................................17
24 Punctuating citations ...........................................................................17
24 Parallel citations ................................................................................17
25 Pinpoint citations ................................................................................17
26 Citation of domestic cases .....................................................................18
27 Citation of international cases and decisions ...............................................19
28 Citation of arbitral awards .....................................................................21
29 Citation of treaties (bilateral/multilateral) and other international instruments .....22
29.1
Treaties ...................................................................................22
29.2
International instruments ..............................................................23
30 Citation of constitutions and domestic legislation .........................................24
31 Citation of legal commentary and secondary sources .....................................25
PART 4: HOW TO COMPLETE THE OXFORD LAW ONLINE CASE HEADNOTE TEMPLATE .......26
32 Some general points on the template ........................................................26
32.1
Fields and field names ..................................................................26
32.2
Order of the fields in the template ...................................................26
32.3
Do not amend the template ...........................................................26
32.4
Mandatory vs optional fields ...........................................................26
‘IIC only’ fields .....................................................................................26
33 Field-by-field guidance .........................................................................26
33.1
Fields for OUP use only .................................................................26
33.2
Type - MANDATORY .....................................................................27
33.3
Citations - MANDATORY.................................................................27
33.4
Case name - MANDATORY ..............................................................28
33.5
Other case name ........................................................................30
33.6
Date - MANDATORY ......................................................................31
33.7
Date of despatch to parties ............................................................31
33.8
Governing law - MANDATORY ..........................................................32
33.10
Seat of arbitration - MANDATORY .....................................................34
33.11
Judges/Arbitrators - MANDATORY.....................................................34
33.12
Counsel for Party 1 - MANDATORY ....................................................35
33.13
Counsel for Party 2 - MANDATORY ....................................................36
33.14
Arbitral rules - MANDATORY ...........................................................36
33.16
Previous stages ..........................................................................36
33.17
Subsequent stages .......................................................................37
33.18
Related developments ..................................................................38
33.19
Key subjects - MANDATORY ............................................................39
33.20
Keywords - MANDATORY ................................................................39
33.21
Core issue(s) - MANDATORY ............................................................40
33.22
Facts - MANDATORY .....................................................................40
33.23
Held - MANDATORY ......................................................................42
-2-
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
33.24
33.25
33.26
33.27
33.28
33.29
33.30
33.31
Oct -07
Commentary .............................................................................45
Further commentary ....................................................................47
Instruments cited ........................................................................48
Cases cited ...............................................................................49
Reporter - MANDATORY .................................................................50
Reporter date - MANDATORY ..........................................................50
Commentator ............................................................................51
Commentary date .......................................................................51
NOTE– this guide comes with a health warning! It is a work in progress.
In particular, the examples given need further work, and should not be relied upon as a
true application of Oxford Law online citation and style rules.
Unfinished sections/examples are highlighted in yellow in this version. Sections which are
specific to a particular module are highlighted in blue (Investment Claims) or green (ILDC)
– these will be drawn out into module-specific annexes in due course. Cross references
between sections of this document and sections in the Oxford Law online Style and
Citation Guide will be added before this document is finalised. Your comments
on/criticisms of this document are very welcome at this stage.
PART 1: INTRODUCTION
1
Introduction
1.1 Oxford Law online
Oxford University Press (OUP) is developing a portfolio of online services for the legal
market, under the Oxford Law brand. An ambitious development programme for Oxford
Law online services is planned for the next few years and all resulting services will use a
common Style and Citation guide.
The first services to be launched are in the area of international law. They are:
Oxford Reports on International Law (ORIL), which is a ‘horizontal’ case reporting
service made up of 5 modules:

International Courts of General Jurisdiction (ICGJ)

International Criminal Law (ICL)

International Human Rights Law (IHRL)

International Investment Claims (IIC) and

International Law in Domestic Courts (ILDC)
Investment Claims (IC), which is a ‘vertical’ service aimed at those involved in the
conduct of investor-State arbitrations, containing both case law and non-case law
content; and
The Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (EPIL), which is an A-Z
reference service covering the breadth of Public International Law subject matter.
1.2
Aims of this document
-3-
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
This document details the House Style and Citation Rules applicable to Oxford Law online
services, and is essential reading for Reporters, Editors, and in-house staff involved both
in the creation of content, and in its preparation for online publication.
The overall aim is to provide consistent rules to apply across all Oxford Law online
services. OUP does accept that there will be some style/citation requirements that are
specific to one service only, due to the differing needs of users of each service and the
specifics of the included content, and therefore this document also aims to capture those
particular service-specific requirements. Finally, this document aims to provide examples
to assist understanding of the correct style/citation format and of the different
requirements of content for each Oxford Law online service where appropriate.
1.3 To comment on this document
This document is by necessity a work in progress, and will be updated and enhanced as
more specific instructions become clear and are adopted. If you have any comments on
this document, please do let us know. The best way is to choose the contact appropriate
to your role from the list below:

IIC Reporters: Contact Harriet Mancey-Barratt, Assistant Commissioning Editor,
OUP, harriet.mancey-barratt@oup.com, tel: +44 (0) 207 616 5530

ILDC Reporters: Contact Edda Kristjansdottir, Managing Editor, ILDC, University of
Amsterdam, E.Kristjansdottir@uva.nl

Copy Editors: Contact Kate Bailey, Oxford Law online Production Editor, OUP,
kate.bailey@oup.com, tel: +44 (0) 1865 354076
All other reporters and editors: Contact Rajika Shah, Development Editor, OUP,
rajika.shah@oup.com, tel: +44 (0) 1865 354754

Or contact us via OUP reception on +44 (0) 1865 556767.
2
Oxford Law online editorial style
‘Editorial style’ is a set of conventions that controls the presentation of text. A style
decision is needed in any case where there is more than one possible way to formulate a
particular word or entity. ‘House style’ is that set of conventions adopted by a particular
publishing house or imprint.
2.1 House style in an online context
House style takes on a new importance in online publishing, as it is only by following
uniform, predictable rules that it is possible to present users with consistent, reliable
data that is discoverable– ie that can be:
 quickly located via an online search,
 easily found by those browsing the content in a logical and methodical way, and
 properly linked and cross-referenced using hypertext and citators.
It is essential to follow the rules in this document when preparing content for inclusion in
Oxford Law online services.
2.2 Consistent style across all Oxford Law online services
Oxford Law online content is, of course, subject to review and editing by a number of
different people before it is published, but it is important that people at every stage of
the writing and publishing process work to the same set of rules. Reporters and editors
alike should focus at all times on achieving consistency and adherence to Oxford Law
-4-
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
online house style in everything that they submit, from the very first draft to the final
pre-publication copy edit, thus saving time and unnecessary corrections during
production. It is only in this way that an online service can publish content quickly
enough to satisfy user expectations and become a success.
3
Writing for online publication
3.1 Design the content for online publication
Please always remember that content submitted for Oxford Law online services is for
online publication. The online reading environment is so different from print, and the
online research environment is so different from a print library, that traditional printed
content is not well-suited for delivery in online products. Instead, online products need
content that has been designed from the start with the online information experience in
mind.
3.2 Write discrete, concise, highly structured text
The non-physical nature of the online environment favours content that is discrete,
concise, non-linear, and highly structured. Navigation is by links to referenced
information, which may be located in other products. Concise text provides less
information to process. Ideally, a sentence will have no more than twenty words, and a
paragraph will have no more than six sentences; however, non-conforming text may be
excused if conforming would prevent clear, complete, or accurate explication.
3.3 Support users with different interest levels
Oxford Law online web pages are designed to simultaneously support users with different
interest levels:
 Providing Keywords will help users with no interest to avoid the page entirely by
excluding it from search results;
 The one-sentence Core Issue assists filtering by those with lower interest levels, or
helps them determine their level of interest.
 Those with detailed interest are assisted by the writing style itself, which should
be clear and direct.
 A thirst for more information is satisfied by providing a rich set of links to
additional information, and by providing Citator information through the Oxford
Law Citator (see section 20 below), rather than by overloading the document
itself.
3.4 Aim for the hallmarks of strong writing
The familiar and traditional hallmarks of strong writing are therefore even more
important in an online environment. Ensure that you are aiming for:
 logical organization
 active voice
 descriptive nouns and verbs
 conciseness
4
Acceptable language
While not strictly a matter of house style, this is a convenient point at which to draw
attention to issues of language.
4.1 Clear, concise, and logical
Before submitting the headnote, read it over carefully to ensure that it is as clear and
concise as possible. Edit out repetition and make sure that the sentences unfold logically.
-5-
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
4.2 Avoid parochial references
OUP’s publications have an international readership. Avoid parochial references to ‘this
country’, ‘our legal system’, etc, and take all reasonable steps to identify people, places,
institutions, and other entities that may be puzzling to readers from outside your country
and/or your intended readership.
4.3 Avoid offensive language
Please make every effort to avoid any form of language or expression that might be
interpreted by a reader as racist or sexist, derogatory of a particular religion or creed, or
otherwise offensive. The gender-specific pronouns ‘he’, ‘his’, ‘him’ should be avoided in
any reference relevant to males and females; to achieve this, pluralize the reference,
repeat the noun, use the passive voice, or use both pronoun forms (though the last
solution is clumsy and undesirable for more than occasional use).
4.4 Use the past tense
When reporting decisions, remember that your report will remain online long after the
events about which you are writing have passed. In an online environment users expect
content to be up-to-date, and will often assume that a headnote which states that ‘the
law in relation to x is y’ is still accurate, although the law may have changed since the
report was written.
To avoid reports becoming quickly dated and even misleading to future readers, use the
past tense (‘it was clear that the law in relation to x was y’).
-6-
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
PART 2: STYLE GUIDE
5
British style
Please note that Oxford Law online generally employs British idioms, vocabulary, spelling,
and punctuation.
6
Spelling and hyphenation
Oxford Law online uses the ending ‘-ize’ / ‘-ization’ / ‘-izing in words where this
alternative is available in British English. Note that ‘z’ may not be substituted for ‘s’ in
words ending ‘-yse’ (‘analyse’, ‘paralyse’). A good dictionary, such as the most recent
edition of the Concise Oxford English Dictionary, the Oxford Dictionary of English, or the
Oxford Spelling Dictionary provides the best means of ensuring consistent treatment of
spelling and hyphenation. If you are not able to access a print version, the Compact
Oxford English Dictionary can be found online at http://www.askoxford.com.
Use one of the Oxford dictionaries listed above to determine whether two elements
should be hyphenated, run together, or set as single words (‘short-lived’, ‘layout’,
‘common sense’). Words with prefixes are usually written without hyphens
(‘predetermine’, ‘multinational’), unless there is a collision of vowels or consonants
(‘anti-intellectual’, ‘pre-eminent’). Note, however, that, notwithstanding the doubled
‘o’, the words ‘cooperate’ and ‘coordinate’ are usually spelt without a hyphen.
Dashes should follow closed up em rules. Do not include a space either before or after the
dash, which should be long ‘—’ rather than short ‘-’: Going—going—gone!
7
Punctuating text
A hallmark of OUP’s house style is the serial comma, the comma before ‘and’ or ‘or’ in
lists of three or more items: ‘red, white, and blue’, ‘feminine, masculine, or neuter’.
Use three full points spaced from each other and from the words either side to indicate
matter omitted from a quotation. An extra full point to indicate the end of a sentence
before or after the ellipsis is optional: it is generally easier to omit it.
Abbreviations, contractions, and initials should not be given full points (see more on
abbreviations below).
8
Quotations
8.1 Quotation marks
OUP favours single quotation marks, reserving double ones for quoted matter within a
quotation; eg ‘The distinction between “academic” and “practitioner” texts is critical in
legal publishing.’
8.2 Displayed quotations
Incorporate quotations of three lines or less into the text, within single quotation marks.
Longer quotations should generally be referenced via a citation, or in the case of a quote
from a judgment, via a link to the source text, rather than by wholesale extraction of the
quote into the body of the headnote.
In the exceptional instance when inclusion of a longer quotation is appropriate, it should
be made into a displayed quotation. Separate the quotation from the text by a line space
above and below, and indent both the right and left margins. Quotations marks are not
used around displayed quotations.
-7-
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
As referred to earlier, the right to development has been included in some post-independence
African constitutions. It is included in the Malawi Constitution in its justiciable Bill of Rights. Section
30 of that Constitution provides:
(1) All persons and peoples have a right to development and thereto the enjoyment of
economic, social, cultural and political development and women, children and the
disabled in particular shall be given special consideration in the application of this right.
(2) The state shall take all measures for the realization of the right to development.
The advocates for the inclusion of the right to development in the Constitution were the disgruntled
Malawian elite, who were not in government, and the displeased international donors, who were
concerned with the prevailing culture of corruption, lack of accountability, and transparency on the
part of government.
8.3 Quoting verbatim
Quotations from other works, judgments, statutes, etc must be faithful to the original,
except where it is necessary to change quotation marks from single to double, or vice
versa. Do not change errors in the original, but instead use [sic].
8.4 Punctuating quotations
Quotations within short quotations take double quotation marks. Punctuation follows the
closing quotation mark, unless it is part of the quotation.
Generally, use a colon to introduce a long quotation. However, when the lead-in moves
seamlessly into the quoted material a comma or no punctuation may be preferable. Begin
with an ellipsis ( . . . ) when a quotation starts mid-sentence.
8.5 Omissions from quotations
Indicate omissions from a quotation with an ellipsis, and any change of emphasis in a
parenthetical clause after the citation by use of ‘(emphasis added)’. If you omit citations
or footnotes from a quotation, put ‘(citation(s) omitted)’ or ‘(footnote(s) omitted)’ after
the source.
‘ . . . the House of Lords also concluded that the civil standard of proof (on the balance of
probabilities) should be applied in such a way as to be sensitive to the “seriousness of the matters to
be proved and the implications of proving them,” which in effect means proof beyond reasonable
doubt (ie the criminal standard).’
9
Capitalization
In general, besides proper nouns, use capital initials for the full and abbreviated formal
names of courts, institutions, organizations, buildings, official documents, and the like,
but do not use them for common nouns. When referencing court documents or items
listed in court documents, please follow the style of capitalization used in those
documents. Beyond this, the use of capital initials should be kept to a minimum, both in
text and in headings.
10
Italics
In open text italics are used for foreign words and terms unless these have become
accepted usage, in which case use roman type; so general Latin abbreviations, such as
‘ibid’ and ‘cf’, are not italicized, though sic, passim, and c (circa) are. The New Oxford
Dictionary for Writers and Editors offers guidance on the use of italics generally.
-8-
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
This principle applies to specialist usage too. In legal publishing ultra vires, de facto, and
interalia all appear in roman, while more specialized legal terms are given in italic.
Italics are also used for the titles of books, journals, works of art, films, and some other
kinds of self-contained works. Note, however, that the titles of all law reports and
reviews (as well as their abbreviations) are set in roman.
11
Numbers
11.1 Words and figures
Spell out numbers up to and including nine and use figures from 10 onwards. There are
exceptions to the use both of words and figures:
 use figures for numbered sections of a document: ‘Article 5 of the treaty’
 use figures for units of measure: ‘30 kilometres’
 use figures for dates: ‘9 September 2001’
 use figures for people’s ages: ‘she was 58 years old’
 use words at the beginning of a sentence: ‘Two hundred and fifty gold bars were
stolen.’
 use words for approximate numbers: ‘At least a thousand people were present.’
 use a mixture of figures and words for round numbers of a million or more: ‘£8.5
million’
11.2 Number Ranges
Avoid the use of number ranges when citing case law or legislative or treaty provisions,
whether in the body text or a citation. This is because each provision within a number
range will require a separate link to the Oxford Law Citator. Rather than citing the range
(eg, ‘sections 2 to 5’), you should list each provision (‘sections 2, 3, 4, and 5’) separated
by commas, and apply Oxford Law Citator mark-up to each provision individually (see
section 20 below), to denote that separate links are to be included to each provision.
When listing a number range where a link to the Oxford Law Citator would not be
appropriate, omit as many digits as possible, except for digits in (or ending with) the
group 10 to 19: She worked at 25-6 Sidney Street; 100-2; 10-11; 118-19. Do not elide
figures when a range of years is referred to crossing between centuries: 1820-1910.
Closed up en rules must be used for date ranges and elided numbers. Do not include a
space either before or after the dash, which should be short ‘-’ rather than long ‘—’.
12
Dates
In British style, dates are formulated with two-digit day, two-digit month, and four-digit
year, without commas: 11 November 1918. Please do not abbreviate months of the year,
including in citations.
13
Abbreviations
13.1 Define abbreviations
Avoid unfamiliar abbreviations and define any that you use in the text. You need not
define an abbreviation that is part of everyday usage (eg, ‘eg’ or ‘etc’). Every lawyer can
also be taken to know some additional abbreviations. For tables of common abbreviations
that need no definition, see Appendices 1-3 at the back of the full OSCOLA guide,
beginning on p 38.
Spell out all but the commonest abbreviations at the first mention; thereafter, an
abbreviation may be used without explanation.
-9-
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
When first defining the abbreviation of a case, instrument, or other cited item, put the
abbreviation in round brackets after both the citation and its associated link type.
In 1836 they had both been elected to the newly organized London Working Men’s Association
(LWMA), which became one of the constituent foundation organizations of the Chartist
movement in Britain from 1838 . . . The LWMA, led by William Lovett, was the embodiment of
the moderate element of Chartism.
Add link type example
13.2 No full points in abbreviations
As a general rule, abbreviations should not be given full points. Thus, ‘eg’ is correct
rather than ‘e.g.’, ‘LQR’ rather than ‘L.Q.R.’, ‘HL’ rather than ‘H.L.’, etc.
Neither abbreviations (truncated forms) nor contractions (that is, forms in which at least
the first and last letters of the word are retained) take full points.
Abbreviations for work titles are given in italic if the full title appears so: OED (Oxford
English Dictionary).
13.3 Months of the year
Do not abbreviate months of the year, including in citations.
14
Attributions to judges
If it is useful for your purposes to name the deciding judge in the body text, use the
judge's surname followed by the conventional abbreviation identifying their judicial
office. Do not use honorifics such as 'the Honourable'. So, for example,
In Lippiatt v South Gloucestershire Council, Evans LJ stated that…
15
Links to other Internet websites
Sometimes, a cited item will have a related URL, where the full text of (for example) an
article can be found. This is useful information for the reader, but it is a strict Oxford
Law online policy that links to Internet sites do not appear anywhere in the text of a case
headnote, so that the data is not outdated when the destination page of the link is moved
or removed. Instead, OUP will capture this information in the relevant Citator entry for
the item cited. This will make it much easier to keep this information up-to-date.
To facilitate this, please include any relevant URLs after the citation, outside the
asterisks and after the link type (if assigned). Use square brackets around the URL and
make the text bold, so that it is clear what needs to be captured for the Citator.
Insert Example
16
Names of countries and other jurisdictions
Countries should be listed according to the common name rather than the full official
name. Omit any references to ‘Government of’, ‘Kingdom of’, ‘Commonwealth of’, etc,
in body text. The same rules apply to entities that are not recognised as ‘States’ by the
international community but which nevertheless have their own legal systems, such as
Taiwan or the Turkish Cypriot community.
- 10 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
United States
NOT United States of America
Jordan
NOT Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan
United Kingdom
NOT United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
17
Foreign names
Names of parties other than names of persons / companies / organizations should be
given in English translation (eg ‘Foreign Ministry’, ‘Embassy’ etc).
Names of courts should be given in English, followed by the name in the original language
in round brackets if the translation seems likely to cause confusion (eg, Cour d’arbitrage
in Belgium, which is a Supreme Court and not a court of arbitration) or if the court is
most widely known internationally by its name in the original language (eg, Germany’s
Bundesverfassungsgericht). Please see Appendix X to this Guide for a country-based list of
translated court names.
18
Description of the parties
Terms such as ‘plaintiff’, ‘defendant’, ‘applicant’, ‘respondent’, etc, should be avoided
when describing the parties. Please use the actual names of the parties instead, as this
avoids confusion.
- 11 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
PART 3: CITATION GUIDE
19
Introduction
The guidance given here is broadly based upon two separate documents.

The Oxford Standard for the Citation of Legal Authorities (OSCOLA), which may be
found in full and in a shortened version on the University of Oxford Law Faculty
website at http://www.law.ox.ac.uk, is the basis of the citation punctuation rules
applied to Oxford Law online content.

The New York University School of Law Guide to Foreign and International Legal
Citations (NYU Guide), which is published by the Journal of International Law and
Politics and may be found in full on the Journal’s website at
http://www.law.nyu.edu/journals/jilp/, mainly provides guidance on the
substance and order of information within citations.
Please consult the full OSCOLA and NYU Guide documents if these notes do not cover your
needs. In the event of a conflict between them and this Guide, this Guide prevails. If you
are still in doubt, please contact Rajika Shah (rajika.shah@oup.com) for help.
Please note that Oxford Law online citation guidance differs in a number of general
respects from both OSCOLA and the NYU Guide. These differences include the following
points:
 The order of case law citations is slightly different from either OSCOLA or the NYU
Guide. The party names will come first, followed by the procedural stage (if this is
meant to be included; see examples within this document for guidance), any
official reference number given to the case by the court, and/or any official report
of the case. The OUP citation will follow next, separated by a semicolon.
 Further parallel citations (eg, references in non-official, non-OUP reports) will
then be listed, also separated by semicolons.
 Italics are reserved for citations of party names in cases.
 Oxford Law online citation style for treaties differs from the NYU Guide and
OSCOLA in that descriptive phrases, such as ‘entered into force’ or ‘as modified
by’, are written in roman, not italics.
These and other differences are highlighted where relevant in the text below.
20
Oxford Law Citator
Oxford Law online websites are all cross-referenced using the Oxford Law Citator. This
system sits behind the live websites and manages relationships and links, both between
different headnotes within Oxford Law online products, and between Oxford Law online
content and other external references. It is, therefore, crucial that citations in Oxford
Law online products be as accurate, complete, and uniform as possible.
20.1 Marking citations for the Oxford Law Citator
All citations and references will link to the Oxford Law Citator, subject to the two
exceptions outlined below. Mark-up is required in the headnote to indicate where the
citations begin and end, and what portion of the citation should be linked. This mark-up
will not be displayed in the published content—its purpose is to assist data capture by
denoting the extent and attributes of the citation.
- 12 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
Exception: Citations contained in the Citations field of the headnote template will not be
linked, but instead will drive a number of functional aspects of the relevant websites (eg,
how the title of a case displays within a set of search results or at the top of the
headnote document when displayed online) This field therefore has its own set of markup rules, which can be found at section 33.3 below.
Exception: Repeated citations within the same paragraph of text also will not be linked
and need not be marked up for the Citator.
Citation mark-up is to be added by the reporter once the citation is in the correct format
for publication, according to Oxford Law online citation style. Marking citations for the
Citator involves the following steps:
20.1.1 Asterisks
Firstly, add asterisks at the start and end of each citation or reference in the headnote,
including between the asterisks the party names, the procedural stage, and all parallel
references. In addition, be aware of the following:
 If the item being cited or referenced is in the body of the text, and is preceded by
a reference to, for example, a specific treaty article, include that provision inside
the first asterisk
 If more than one provision is cited, make a separate link, flanked by asterisks, for
each provision
 In the Instruments cited field, add asterisks around each listed provision separately
20.1.2 Underlining
Underline the part of the citation which will appear as a link (in blue and underlined)
when displayed in the headnote online. Oxford Law online policy for underlining is as
follows:
 For cases, only the names of the parties and the procedural stage (if any) are
underlined
 For instruments (including treaties, statutes, constitutions, resolutions, etc), only
the title is underlined
 If the item being cited or referenced is in the body of the text, and is preceded by
a reference to, for example, a specific treaty article, also underline that provision
or provisions
 If more than one provision is cited, make a separate link, underlined, for each
provision
 In the Instruments cited field, underline each listed provision separately
- 13 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide

Oct -07
*Fedax NV v Venezuela, Award, ICSID Case No ARB/96/3; IIC 102 (1998); 5 ICSID Rep 200;
37 ILM 1391, signed 9 March 1998*
*Prosecutor v Jelisić, Appeal Judgment, Case No IT-95-10-A ICTY (5 July 2001); ICL 45 (ICTY
2001)*
*Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Advisory
Opinion, ICJ Rep 1951 (28 May) p 15; ICGJ 227 (ICJ 1951)*
*Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (23 May 1969) 1155 UNTS 331, entered into force 27
January 1980*
Following the completion of the Prosecution’s evidence but prior to the commencement of the
Defence case, the Trial Chamber informed the parties that it would be rendering a judgment
pursuant to *Rule 98bis(B) of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the International Tribunal
for the former Yugoslavia, UN Doc IT/32/Rev7 (1996)*.




20.2 Link Types
A link type is a marker, placed in the text, which denotes the relationship between the
item being cited and the document that is the subject of the headnote. It also tells the
Oxford Law Citator how to display the cross-reference to users. A citation will retain the
same link type throughout the headnote.
20.2.1 Assigning link types
Citations in the headnote will each need to have a link type assigned.
Please note that citations in the following fields do not require reporters to assign a link
type, nor editors to check the link type, because the link types will be automatically
assigned by virtue of the citation appearing in the relevant field:
 Previous stages—automatically assigned {previous procedural stage} link type
 Subsequent stages—automatically assigned {subsequent procedural stage} link type
 Related developments—automatically assigned {related developments} link type


Further commentary—automatically assigned {further commentary} link type
Governing law—automatically assigned {governing law} link type
For all other citations, reporters bear the primary responsibility for assigning a link type
at least once in the headnote. It is recommended that the link types are added to all
items listed in the Instruments cited and Cases cited fields. In addition, reporters must
assign a link type to items that do not appear in these fields, but are cited elsewhere in
the headnote text. Once these link types have been designated, the same link type will
then be automatically assigned by the data capturers to that citation when it appears
anywhere else in the text.
Insert the appropriate link type in curly brackets, directly after the final asterisk around
each citation for Oxford Law Citator mark-up:

Use {mentioned} for items that are referenced in the decision but only in passing,
with little to no further examination or analysis, and that are not central to the
decision. This will include basic procedural rules or provisions under which an
action is brought, where the mention of the rule or provision in the case adds
nothing to its interpretation.
- 14 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide



Oct -07
Use {discussed} for citations which are more important to the decision, where
there has been discussion of the principles, meaning, or interpretation of the case
or provision cited.
If an item is not given a link type, OUP will assign a link type of {mentioned} as a
default. It is therefore very important that you identify those citations which are
more important to the case, or in relation to which the case provides clarification,
by assigning the link type {discussed}. This will show that the item was cited as
important to the reported decision, or that the meaning or application of the item
was discussed in the decision.
Use {mentioned only in headnote} for items that first appear in the Commentary
field AND which are not mentioned or discussed anywhere in the main decision but
instead only mentioned by the reporter.
Examples
*Fedax NV v Venezuela, Award, ICSID Case No ARB/96/3; IIC 102 (1998); 5 ICSID Rep 200; 37 ILM 1391,
signed 9 March 1998* {mentioned}
*Prosecutor v Jelisić, Appeal Judgment, Case No IT-95-10-A ICTY (5 July 2001); ICL 45 (ICTY 2001)*
{mentioned}
*Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Advisory
Opinion, ICJ Rep 1951 (28 May) p 15; ICGJ 227 (ICJ 1951)* {mentioned only in headnote}
*Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (23 May 1969) 1155 UNTS 331, entered into force 27 January
1980* {discussed}
Following the completion of the Prosecution’s evidence but prior to the commencement of the Defence
case, the Trial Chamber informed the parties that it would be rendering a judgment pursuant to *Rule
98bis(B) of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the International Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, UN
Doc IT/32/Rev7 (1996)*{discussed}
21
Formulating a full case citation
21.1 Party Names, Re, Ex Parte, etc
When citing cases in full, party names should always be listed first. Where there are
multiple parties, name only the first claimant and first respondent, using ‘and ors’ or
‘and anors’ where relevant. Where the parties are individuals, omit given names and
initials, unless to do so would be very confusing for the reader. Abbreviate only very
common words and phrases: use Co for Company, Int’l for International, and so on.
Use italics for the names of the parties, EXCEPT in the Citations field (where the party
names are in roman), with an unpunctuated italic v to separate the names of adverse
parties. Use roman for the rest of the citation.
Use Re in preference to In re, In the matter of, etc:
 Re the Companies Act 1985 rather than In the matter of the Companies Act 1985,
and
 Re Farquar’s Estate instead of In re the Estate of Farquar.
Abbreviate Ex parte to Ex p with a capital E at the beginning of a case name but in lower
case elsewhere. The p has no full stop.
- 15 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
Generally, do not include expressions such as and another, which may appear in titles in
law reports, but do use and anor or and ors where relevant.
21.2 Anonymous and non-existent party names
Where a party is anonymous, please use the original alias used by the court in the case
(eg ‘John Doe’ in the United States; the party’s initials in Austria). If no alias is used,
please write [Anonymous] in square brackets and, if used in the judgment, a descriptive
term (eg, ‘a German national’; ‘victim’s relatives’). If no party name is given, please
formulate one based on, for example, the procedural description of the case:
*East German Expropriation Case (individual constitutional complaint
procedure), 112 BVerfGE 1, 49; ILDC 66 (DE 2004); 2 BvR 955/00, 1038/01;
[2005] NVwZ 560, 567*
21.3 Procedural stages in the citation
Where the inclusion of a procedural stage is indicated in a citation, it should always
follow directly after the party names, separated from them by a comma. Never place
round or square brackets around the procedural stage.
22
Incomplete and uncertain citations: [need full cite] and [review cite]
Although reporters and editors should make every effort to formulate a complete and full
citation, it may not always be possible. In that case, rather than simply leaving an
incomplete or badly formatted citation as it is, please insert either [need full cite] or
[review cite]. All Oxford Law online content will go through a process, following copy
editing and conversion to XML, in which the legal research will be carried out to then fill
in the gaps. Once converted, the marker will not be visible to the online reader on the
face of the document.
Place the appropriate marker after the elements of the citation that already exist, in
square brackets, within the asterisks required for Oxford Law Citation mark-up (see
section 20)


Incomplete citations should be given the marker [need full cite]. This will be used
to alert the citation researchers to the fact that there is further research to be
done.
Uncertain citations should be given the marker [review cite]. This will indicate to
the citation researchers that the citation needs further checking.
23
23.1
Cite a

When to use full and abbreviated citations
First mention
case or instrument in full in the following instances:
In the fields which only contain citations (ie, Citations, Instruments cited, and
Cases cited fields)
 In the first full mention in the remainder of the headnote.
23.2 Repeated mentions
All subsequent mentions of the same case or instrument should be shortened according to
the following rules.
- 16 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
23.2.1 Abbreviating names
Shorten citations to one or more party names if citing a case (eg, ‘Glebe Motors plc v
Dixon-Greene’ can be shortened to ‘the Glebe Motors case’, or ‘Glebe Motors’), or the
common name of the instrument if citing a statute, treaty, United Nations (UN)
resolution, constitution, etc.
In shipping cases, use the name of the ship instead of the full case name (for example,
The Eurymedon).
In criminal cases it is conventional to abbreviate ‘in R v Caldwell’ to ‘in Caldwell’. In civil
cases that kind of abbreviation is also acceptable, subject to the warning that the name
chosen must be that which stands first in the full name of the case.
23.2.2 Excluding references
All references which tell the user where to find the cited item should be omitted after
the first full mention in the text.
*Barrett v Enfield LBC [2001] 2 AC 550 (HL)*
*Barrett v Enfield LBC*
*International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (7 March
1966) 660 UNTS 195, entered into force 4 January 1969* (ICERD)
*ICERD*
24
Punctuating citations
Use punctuation only where its omission would cause information to run together, hence
‘QB’ rather than ‘Q.B.’ and ‘WLR’ rather than ‘W.L.R.’.
Use commas to separate numbers that might otherwise run together, such as the first
page of a report and a pinpoint (on pinpoints, see section 25 below).
*Corfu Channel (United Kingdom v Albania), Compensation, Order, ICJ Rep 1949 (19 November) p 237;
ICGJ 200 (ICJ 1949)*
24
Parallel citations
List as many parallel citations as possible, using semicolons to separate the citations. To
the extent that there is an ‘official’ citation, it should be listed first. Thus: *Bush v Gore
531 US 98 (2000); 121 S Ct 525; 148 L Ed 2d 388*.
If the item is included in Oxford Law online and therefore has an OUP citation, list the
OUP citation directly after the official citation and before any other reporter series.
Thus: *Behrooz v Secretary of the Department of Immigration and Multicultural and
Indigenous Affairs, (2004) 219 CLR 486; ILDC 511 (AU 2004); [2004] HCA 36*.
25
Pinpoint citations
When citing a case as authority for a proposition, add a pinpoint citation if possible, to
indicate exactly where the passage on which you are relying is to be found.
- 17 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
Where the citation ends with the identification of a court by its acronym in brackets, the
pinpoint follows that attribution without any comma. Where there is no such attribution,
or where there is more than one pinpoint, insert a comma to prevent the numbers
running together. Where the pinpoint reference is to the first page of the report, repeat
the page number.
*Beattie v E & F Beattie Ltd [1938] Ch 708 (CA) 708*
*Cooper v McKenna, ex p Bishop [1986] WLR 327 (CA) 328, 333*
*R v Leeds County Court, ex p Morris [1990] QB 523 (QB) 526–29*
*El Ajou v Dollar Land Holdings [1993] 3 All ER 717 (Ch) 738, 739–40*
*Associated Newspapers Ltd v Wilson [1995] 2 AC 454 (HL) 479 (Browne-Wilkinson LJ)*
If the case has numbered paragraphs, use the paragraph number in square brackets as a
pinpoint, rather than the page number:
*Re A (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation) [2000] EWCA Civ 401; [2001] Fam 147 [20], [25]*
*Costello v Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary [2001] EWCA Civ 381; [2001] 1 WLR 1437 [1]–[30]*
26
Citation of domestic cases
Subject to the style and punctuation rules laid out above, cite cases from domestic
jurisdictions as they are cited in the NYU Guide, with one difference: always include the
names of the parties.
If an alternative or short form of citation is indicated in the NYU Guide, it is preferred to
the long or full form. Reporters citing cases from jurisdictions that are not covered in the
NYU Guide should follow and adapt as necessary the guidelines for similar jurisdictions
and highlight the full citation in yellow when submitting content to OUP.
*Michael v Johnson 426 US 346; 23 S Ct 118 (1976)*.
NOT Michael v. Johnson, 426 U.S. 346, 23 S.Ct. 118 (1976).
*State of Israel v Pelach Cr A 7024/93, PD 49 (1) 1*.
NOT Cr. A. 7024/93, The State of Israel v. Pelach, P.D. 49 (1) 1.
*Party 1 v Party 2 Cass 30 January 1973, Pa 1973, I, 524*.
NOT Cass. 30 januari 1973, Pas. 1973, I, 524.
*Public Prosecutor v Anthony Wee Boon Chye and anor [1965] 1 MLJ 189*.
NOT Public Prosecutor v. Anthony Wee Boon Chye and Anor [1965] 1 M.L.J. 189.
*Jorge Cassals Romero Amparo directo 91/99, Segundo Tribunal Colegiado en Materia Administrativa
del Tercer Circuito*.
NOT Amparo directo 91/99, Jorge Cassals Romero, Segundo Tribunal Colegiado en Materia
Administrativa del Tercer Circuito.
*Party 1 v Party 2 STSJ Cataluña (social) 15 January 1993 (A 2246)*.
NOT STSJ Cataluña (social) 15 enero 1993 (A 2246).
- 18 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
27
Citation of international cases and decisions
Subject to the style and punctuation rules laid out above, cite international cases and
decisions as they are cited below.
The following table lists each of the international courts and tribunals for which specific
guidance is given in either the NYU Guide or OSCOLA. First find the relevant court or
tribunal. Then follow the citation formulation given in the examples, which are
authoritative for Oxford Law online citation style. Should you need further guidance or
information, page numbers to the full discussion in either the NYU Guide or OSCOLA are
also provided.
If an alternative or short form of citation is indicated in the NYU Guide entry for a
particular court or tribunal, it is preferred to the long or full form.
Be aware that Oxford Law online citation style differs from both the NYU Guide and
OSCOLA in that the procedural stage is always included in the citation when citing
international criminal law and arbitration cases.
If a particular tribunal is not listed below, then please follow and adapt as necessary the
guidelines as listed in the NYU Guide for similar jurisdictions, and highlight the full
citation in yellow when submitting content to OUP.
Body
‘Regulation 64’ Panels in
the Courts of Kosovo
African Commission on
Human and Peoples’ Rights
African Court of Human and
Peoples’ Rights
NYU
Guide
page
260
265
265
Benelux Economic Union
Court of Justice (BeneluxGerechtshof)
Common Court of Justice
and Arbitration for the
Organization for the
Harmonization
of Corporate Law in Africa
Court of Justice of the
Common Market for Eastern
and Southern Africa
263
Court of Justice of the
European Free Trade
Agreement (EFTA)
263
264
265
Example
Follow guidelines for the Crimes Panels of the
District Court of Dili (East Timor)
*Andre Houver v Morocco African Comm Hum &
Peoples' Rights, Comm No 41/90 (28 March 1990)*
*Decision Regarding Communication 155/96
(Social and Economic Rights Action
Center/Center for Economic and Social Rights v
Nigeria) Case No ACHPR/COMM/A044/1 (Afr
Comm'n Hum & Peoples' Rts, 27 May 2002)*
*Christian Dior perfumes Benelux Court of Justice
16 December 1998, Case A-95/4, Nederlandse
Jurisprudentie 2001 No 133*
See NYU Guide for full details
*Martin Ogang v Eastern and Southern African
Trade and Development Bank and Dr Michael
Gondwe COMESA Court of Justice Consolidated
Interlocutory Applications No
1A/2000 and 1C/2000 [Judgment of 30 March
2001]*.
*Sverige v Norway Case E-8/97 TV 1000, [1998]
EFTA Ct Rep 68, at para 26*
- 19 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Body
Crimes Panels of the District
Court of Dili (East Timor),
Panels and Appeals
NYU
Guide
page
260
European Commission of
Human Rights
European Court of Human
Rights (after 1 Nov 1998)
European Court of Human
Rights (before 1 Jan 1999)
European Court of Justice
and Court of First Instance
(after 1 January 1989)
European Court of Justice
and Court of First Instance
(before 1 January 1989)
Extraordinary Chambers in
the Courts of Cambodia
Inter-American Court of
Human Rights
International Court of
Justice
262
International Criminal Court
259
International Criminal
Tribunal for Rwanda
259
International Criminal
Tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia
International Tribunal for
the Law of the Sea
259
Iran-United States Claims
Tribunal
Nuremberg International
Military Tribunal
Permanent Court of
International Justice
Special Court for Sierra
Leone
OSCOLA
p 32
OSCOLA
p 30
228
261
262
238
Oct -07
Example
*Criminal Appeal No 7 of 2001 Arising from the
Original Criminal Case No
02/PID.C.G./2000/PD.Dil. of the Special Crimes
Panel of Dili District Court*
*N v Sweden no 11366/85, Commission decision of
16 October 1986, DR 50, p 173*
*Malhous v Czech Republic (dec) [GC] no
33071/96, 13 December 2000, ECHR 2000-XII*
*McCann and ors v United Kingdom judgment of
27 September 1995, Series A no 324*
*Tremblay and ors v Commission Case T-224/95,
[1997] ECR II-2215*
238
*Commission v Italy Case 120/88, [1991] ECR I621*
260
Follow guidelines for the Crimes Panels of the
District Court of Dili (East Timor)
*Velasquez Rodriguez case I/A Court HR,
Judgment of 29 July 1986, Series C No 4*
*Fisheries Jurisdiction (United Kingdom v Iceland)
Jurisdiction of the Court, Judgment, ICJ Rep 1973
(2 February) p 3*
*Ex p Prosecutor, Situation in Uganda—Decision
on Prosecutor’s Application for Leave to Appeal in
Part Pre-Trial Chamber II’s Decision on the
Prosecutor’s Applications for Warrants of Arrest
Under Article 58, Case No ICC-02/04-01/05 (19
August 2005)*
*Prosecutor v Serushago, Order for the Continued
Detention of Omar Serushago in the ICTR
Detention Facility in Arusha, Case No ICTR-98-39A (3 April 2001)*
*Prosecutor v Vasiljevic, Appeal Judgment, Case
No IT-98-32-A ICTY (25 February 2004)*
263
228
257
260
*Southern Bluefin Tuna (Australia v Japan; New
Zealand v Japan) Provisional Measures, Order of
27 August 1999 ITLOS Reports 2000*
*Starrett Housing Corporation v Iran (1983) 4
Iran-USCTR 122*
*Judgment of the Nuremberg International
Military Tribunal 1946 (1947) 41 AJIL 172*
*River Meuse Case (Netherlands v Belgium) (1937)
PCIJ Series A/B no 70*
*Prosecution v Sankoh, Decision on the
Prosecutor's Motion for Immediate Protective
Measures for Witnesses and Victims and for Non- 20 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Body
NYU
Guide
page
Tokyo International Military
Tribunal
United Nations human rights
committees,
Communications (HRC,
CESCR, CERD, CEDAW, CRC,
CT)
World Trade Organization
Appellate Body Reports
OSCOLA
p 30
257
World Trade Organization
Panel Reports
253
253
Oct -07
Example
public Disclosure, Case No SCSL-2003-02-PT (23
May 2003)*
Follow guidelines for the Nuremberg International
Military Tribunal
*Mikmaq Tribal Society v Canada UN Human
Rights Committee, Communication no 205/1986*
*Appellate Body Report on United States –
Restrictions on Imports of Cotton and Manmade
Fibre Underwear WT/DS24/AB/R, adopted 25
February 1997*
*Panel Report on United States – Preliminary
Determination with Respect to Certain Softwood
Lumber from Canada WT/DS236/R, adopted 1
September 2002*
28
Citation of arbitral awards
Cite arbitral awards as they are cited below. Only the Permanent Court of Arbitration is
discussed in OSCOLA; beyond that, neither the NYU Guide nor OSCOLA provides any
guidance on citation of arbitral awards. If a particular arbitral institution is not listed
below, then please adapt these guidelines as necessary.
(a) If the proceeding was conducted under the auspices of an arbitral institution (other
than for awards from the Permanent Court of Arbitration), the format for citations of
arbitral awards is:
Case name, Procedural stage, Case number, OUP citation (if any); Parallel citations (if
any), signed/despatched date of signature/date of despatch
(b) If the proceeding was not conducted under the auspices of any arbitral institution, the
format of citations for citations of arbitral awards is:
Case name, Procedural stage, Ad hoc—XXXX Arbitration Rules, OUP citation (if any);
Parallel citations (if any), signed/despatched date of signature/date of despatch
If you are able to determine whether the date provided is the date of signature or date of
despatch, include the word ‘signed’ or ‘despatched’ before the date. If not, then only
write the date. Date of signature is preferable; date of despatch should only be used
when the date of signature is unavailable.
Body
Ad hoc
Association of Southeast
Example
*Link-Trading Joint Stock Co v Moldova, Final award, Ad
hoc—UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, IIC 154 (2002), signed 18
April 2002*
*Yaung Chi Oo Trading PLT Ltd v Myanmar, Final Award,
- 21 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Body
Asian States
International Chamber of
Commerce/International
Court of Arbitration
International Centre for
Settlement of Investment
Disputes
London Court of
International Arbitration
Stockholm Chamber of
Commerce
Permanent Court of
Arbitration (OSCOLA p 32)
Oct -07
Example
ASEAN Case No Arb 01/1, IIC 278 (2003); 42 ILM 540 (2003),
signed 31 March 2003
*Bridas SAIPC et al v Turkmenistan, First decision on
liability—Partial Award, ICC Case No 9058/FMS/KGA, IIC 35
(1999), signed 24 June 1999*
*AES Corporation v Argentina, Decision on jurisdiction,
ICSID Case No ARB/02/17, IIC 4 (2005); 12 ICSID Rep 308,
signed 26 April 2005*
*Goetz and ors v Burundi, Award, ICSID Case No ARB/95/3,
IIC 16 (1999); 6 ICSID Rep 3; 15 ICSID Rev 457; 26 YB Com
Arb 26, despatched 10 February 1999*
*EnCana Corporation v Ecuador, Partial award on
jurisdiction, LCIA Case No UN3481, IIC 90 (2004), signed 27
February 2004*
*Petrobart Ltd v Kyrgyzstan, Award, SCC Case No
126/2003, IIC 184 (2005); SIAR No 2005:3, signed 29 March
2005*
*North Atlantic Coast Fisheries Case (United Kingdom v
United States) (1910) Scott Hague Court Rep 141*
*Alabama Claims Arbitration (1872) 1 Moore Intl
Arbitrations 495*
29
Citation of treaties (bilateral/multilateral) and other international instruments
Subject to the style and punctuation rules laid out above, cite treaties and other
international instruments as they are cited below.
29.1 Treaties
The table below provides examples of Oxford Law online citation format and preferred
abbreviations/nicknames for some commonly cited treaties. For the full list of treaties
and their full Oxford Law online citations and abbreviations, please see Appendix C to
this style and citation guide. Should you need further information, the NYU Guide
provides guidance on citation of treaties, beginning on p 266.
Many treaties are listed with their citations in the NYU Guide beginning on p 267. If you
use the NYU Guide to determine the content of a particular citation, make sure to format
the citation according to the style shown below. If a particular treaty is not listed in the
NYU Guide, look to see if it is discussed in OSCOLA. If it is not listed in either guide, then
simply include as much information as you have and highlight the entire citation in yellow
when submitting content to OUP.
Please note that Oxford Law online citation style for Treaties differs from the NYU Guide
and OSCOLA in that descriptive phrases, such as ‘entered into force’ or ‘as modified by’,
are written in roman, not italics.
Examples
*Agreement on Encouragement and Reciprocal Protection
of Investments (Netherlands-Venezuela) (22 October 1991)
1788 UNTS 45; Tractatenblad 1993, 154; entered into
force 1 November 1993*
*Charter of the United Nations (26 June 1945) 3 Bevans
1153; 59 Stat 1031; TS No 993, entered into force 24
- 22 -
Common nicknames
Netherlands-Venezuela BIT
UN Charter
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
October 1945*
*Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment (10 December 1984)
1465 UNTS 85, as modified by 24 ILM 535 (1985), entered
into force 26 June 1987*
*Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of
Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to
Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects
(with Protocols I, II, and III) (10 October 1980) 1342 UNTS
137, entered into force 2 December 1983*
*Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the
Crime of Genocide (9 December 1948) 78 UNTS 277,
entered into force 12 January 1951*
*Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes
Between States and Nationals of Other States (18 March
1965) 575 UNTS 159, entered into force 14 October 1966*
*General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (30 October
1947) 55 UNTS 187, provisionally entered into force on 1
January 1948 (superceded by GATT 1994)*
*Hague Convention on the Taking of Evidence* (18 March
1970) 847 UNTS 231, entered into force 7 October 1972*
*North American Free Trade Agreement (United StatesCanada-Mexico) (12 December 1992) US Gov’t Printing
Office (1992), entered into force 1 January 1994*
*Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (17 July
1998) UN Doc A/CONF.183/9 of 17 July 1998, entered into
force 1 July 2002*
*United Nations Convention on Contracts for the
International Sale of Goods (11 April 1980) 1489 UNTS 3,
entered into force 1 January 1988*
*United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (10
December 1982) 1833 UNTS 3, entered into force 16
November 1994*
*Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (18 April
1961) 500 UNTS 95, entered into force 24 April 1964*
*Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (23 May 1969)
1155 UNTS 331, entered into force 27 January 1980*
Torture Convention
Conventional Weapons
Convention , CCW, CUSHIE
Genocide Convention
ICSID Convention
GATT
Evidence Convention
NAFTA
Rome Statute
International Sale of Goods
Convention
UNCLOS, Montego Bay
Convention
VCDR
Vienna Convention, VCLT
29.2 International instruments
The following table lists several common types of international instruments, many of
which are produced by international or non-governmental organizations. First look to see
if the relevant instrument or organization is listed below, then follow the citation
formulation given in the examples, which are authoritative for Oxford Law online citation
style. Should you need further guidance or information, page numbers to the full
discussion in either the NYU Guide or OSCOLA are also provided.
If a particular type of document is not listed in the NYU Guide, look to see if it is
discussed in OSCOLA. If it is not listed in either guide, then please follow and adapt as
necessary the guidelines as listed in the NYU Guide for similar entities and highlight the
full citation in yellow when submitting content to OUP.
- 23 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
If an alternative or short form of citation is indicated in the NYU Guide, it is preferred to
the long or full form.
Type of document
EU documents (after 1
January 1968)
EU documents (before 1
July 1967)
EU documents (between 1
July 1967 and 31 December
1967)
International Law
Commission documents
NYU
Guide
page
237
Example
237
*OJ 106, 30 October 1962, p 2553/62*
237
*OJ 174, 31 July 1967, p 1*
OSCOLA
p 35
*ILC, ‘Report of the International Law Commission
on the Work of its 42nd Session’ (1 May–20 July
1990) UN Doc A/45/10*
*YILC (1979) Vol II Part 2, 115 para 3*
International Law
Commission Yearbook
Pre-WTO GATT documents
223
Regional bodies, other
OSCOLA
p 36
UN documents not published
in official records
UN General Assembly
Resolutions
UN official record
documents other than
Resolutions
UN Security Council
Resolutions
UN Yearbook
223
WTO documents
250
253
222
222
221
223
*OJ L 99, 5 May 1970, p 1*
*Treatment by Germany of Imports of Sardines 31
October 1952 GATT BISD (1st Supp) at 53 (1953)*
*Organization for African Unity (Council of
Ministers) ‘Proposals for an OAU Mechanism for
Conflict Prevention and Resolution, Report of
Secretary-General’ (OAU Addis Ababa 1992)
CM/1710 (L.VI)*
*Pellet, ‘Eighth Report on Reservations to
Treaties’ A/CN.4/535 (27 May 2003) pp 10-14*
*UN General Assembly Resolution 2260 UN GAOR at
11, UN Doc A/6883 (1967)*
*Report of the Human Rights Committee, GAOR
58th Session Supplement No 40 (Vol I) at 100, UN
Doc A/58/40 (2002)*
*UN Security Council Resolution 687, 46 UN SCOR
at 200, UN Doc S/RES/687 (1991)*
*1980 UNYB pp 312–314*
*Transitional Review Mechanism Pursuant to
Section 18 on the Accession of the People’s
Republic of China G/ADP/W/436 (23 October
2003) p 2 para 5*
30
Citation of constitutions and domestic legislation
Subject to the style and punctuation rules laid out above, cite constitutions and
legislation as they are cited in the NYU Guide. If a particular constitution or type of
legislation is not listed in the NYU Guide, then please follow and adapt as necessary the
guidelines as listed in the NYU Guide for similar documents and highlight the full citation
in yellow when submitting content to OUP.
- 24 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
If an alternative or short form of citation is indicated in the NYU Guide, it is preferred to
the long or full form.




*Constitution Act: Regeringsformen (RF) SFS (Sweden)*
*Art 325 India Const (1950)*
*Section 6(1) Safety Health & Welfare at Work Act, 1989 (Ireland)*
*Decreto Legislativo 3 Marzo 1999, n 10 (Italy)*
31
Citation of legal commentary and secondary sources
Cite legal commentary, such as books and periodicals, as they are cited in OSCOLA. Rules
can be found beginning on p 19. Pay particular attention to the OSCOLA rules for citation
of journal and periodical titles, including the abbreviations found in Appendices 1-3,
beginning on p 38. If a particular type of source is not listed, then please follow and
adapt as necessary the guidelines for similar documents and highlight the full citation in
yellow when submitting content to OUP.





*JH Baker, An Introduction to English Legal History (4th edn Butterworths, London 2002) 419–
21*
*David G Owen (ed), Philosophical Foundations of Tort Law (revd paperback edn OUP,
Oxford 1997)*
*I Brownlie, ‘The Relation of Law and Power’ in Bin Cheng and ED Brown (eds), Contemporary
Problems in International Law: Essays in Honour of Georg Schwarzenberger on his Eightieth
Birthday (Stevens and Sons, London 1988)*
*J Edelman and others, ‘Tribute to Professor Birks’ (2004) 4 OUCLJ 139*
*K D Askin, ‘Judgments Rendered in 1999 by the International Criminal Tribunals for the
former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda: Tadić (ICTY); Aleksovski (ICTY; Jelisić (ICTY); Ruzindana
(ICTR)’ (2000) 6(2) ILSA J Intl & Comp L 485*
- 25 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
PART 4: HOW TO COMPLETE THE OXFORD LAW ONLINE CASE HEADNOTE TEMPLATE
32
Some general points on the template
32.1 Fields and field names
The template is made up of a number of ‘fields’—ie, boxes in the Word document in
which content is entered. There are rules below (see ‘Field-by-field guidance’, beginning
at section 33) that determine what content must be entered in each field, and the format
that is required.
The fields are named in the template in a consistent and fixed way, regardless of the
particular ORIL module (ILDC, IIC, IHRL etc) in which the content will be published.
(These field names are not necessarily representative of the headings under which the
information will eventually be displayed online; the existence and format of a heading in
each published product is a separate choice, made by OUP during the design of its
websites, to meet the needs of the online user.)
32.2 Order of the fields in the template
The fields are covered below in the order in which they appear in the template.
This is not necessarily the order in which the elements of the content will appear online;
again, this is a separate choice which is made by OUP during the design of the websites.
32.3 Do not amend the template
Consistently structured information is essential to facilitate data capture. The template
is designed to ensure consistent data structure. This process will be frustrated by any
change to the field names, or by any removal, addition, or reordering of the fields.
32.4 Mandatory vs optional fields
Not all fields will need to be filled in, or can be filled in. Mandatory fields are marked
MANDATORY in these instructions. These fields must have a value inserted. The other
fields in the template can remain blank if the information requested is not applicable to
a particular case.
‘IIC only’ fields
Some fields are required only for the case law element of the Investment Claims service
(the Oxford Reports on International Investment Claims, or ‘IIC’). These fields are
denoted in the instructions below by ‘IIC only’ after the field name heading, and are
highlighted in blue to allow them to be extracted into a separate IIC-specific Annex later.
These fields should only be present in your template if you are reporting/editing for IIC.
33
Field-by-field guidance
33.1 Fields for OUP use only
The fields with field names in grey boxes at the start of the template are for OUP Law
Editorial use only. They assist with tracking the headnote through the production process,
and will usually be filled in by OUP or the Editorial team responsible for the module.
These fields are:
- Case ID
- Report Status
- Version Date
- Last Substantive Update
Please do not add to, remove, or in any way change the text in these fields.
- 26 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
33.2 Type - MANDATORY
This field is used to record the type of arbitral decision being reported, and as such is
only required for IIC case headnotes.
Assign a type from the following list:
- Award
- Decision
- OPIC Decision
‘Award’ is used for arbitral awards, both partial and full.
‘Decision’ is used for tribunals’ decisions and orders that do not constitute an award or
OPIC decision. It is also used for any domestic or international court decisions relating to
an arbitral process (for example, judicial review, challenge to arbitrators, enforcement
of appeal etc).
‘OPIC Decision’ is used only for decisions involving an Overseas Private Investment
Corporation.
Please do not expand on these terms in this field (for example, by entering ‘Award on
merits’).
Example
Type:
Award
33.3 Citations - MANDATORY
This field will contain the full and complete citation for the decision being reported. Any
and all parallel citations of which reporters and editors are aware should be included.
Parallel citations should be separated from each other by use of a semicolon. If any
parallel citations are links to the Internet, include the relevant URL in square brackets
and in bold—see section 15 above.
Use citation format and punctuation rules as set out above, EXCEPT do not italicize the
party names.
33.3.1 Asterisks
Include asterisks at the very beginning and at the very end of the full and complete
citation.
33.3.2 Underlining
In this field only, the underlining within the asterisks denotes the part of the case name
and citation that will appear in the search results online, and which will form the heading
in the report of the case when displayed online.
It is not desirable that the entire contents of the field shows online, as the parallel
citations may run to many lines of text. Instead, please ensure that the party names,
procedural stage, any official number, and the OUP reference only are underlined. This is
different from the underlining that is applied to citations in all other fields, where the
underlined part is what will show up as a hypertext link online and includes only the party
names or instrument name.
- 27 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
Examples
Citations:
AES Corporation v Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction, ICSID Case No
ARB/02/17, 12 ICSID Rep 308, signed 26 April 2005
Citations:
Prosecutor v Blaškić, Appeal Judgment, Case No IT-95-14-A ICTY (29 July
2004)
33.4 Case name - MANDATORY
The Case name field is made up of a number of sub-fields, and is used to list the full and
complete names of the parties to the case. There is no need to write ‘v’ or ‘vs’ anywhere
in this field or any of the sub-fields.
33.4.1 Party 1 subfield
This sub-field is used to list the party or all of the parties who would normally appear on
the left-hand side of the ‘v’ in a case name. It should also be used when there is only one
party, or when a procedural description is used in place of party names.
For IIC cases, this information will display online under the heading ‘Investor’. The names
of OPIC investors should therefore be entered here.
Multiple party names within this field should be separated by line-spaces and formatted
into a bullet-point list.
33.4.2 Party 1 Nationality subfield
This field is used only in IIC cases, to list the nationality of the claimant investor. This
should simply be the country name (eg ‘France’, not ‘French’). Countries should be listed
according to the common name rather than the full official name (eg ‘Egypt’, not
‘Kingdom of Egypt’); see section 16 for further guidance.
33.4.3 Party 2 subfield
This field is used to list the parties usually appearing on the right-hand side of the ‘v’ in a
case name.
For IIC cases, this information will display online under the heading ‘Host state’, and the
content of this field must always be a country (eg ‘Empresa Estatal Petroleos del Ecuador
(Petroecuador)’ is deemed to be ‘Ecuador’; this can be discussed further in the Facts
field).
Multiple party names within this field should be separated by line-spaces and formatted
into a bullet-point list.
33.4.4 Party 3 subfield
This field is used to list the names of any intervening or joined parties.
Multiple party names within this field should be separated by line-spaces and formatted
into a bullet-point list.
33.4.5 Party 3 role subfield
This field is used to define the type of role that Party 3 plays in the case. You must
choose from one of the following options:
- Intervening
- Intervening as Party 1
- 28 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
-
Oct -07
Intervening as Party 2
Joining
Joining Party 1
Joining Party 2
Ex Parte
Victim
33.4.6 Additional notes on party names
General rules can be found above for formulating anonymous and non-existent party
names (section 21.2), names of countries and other jurisdictions (section 16), and foreign
party names (section 17). The rules below offer additional guidance on how to fill in the
Party subfields.
33.4.6.1
Foreign party names
Do not insert the name in the original language in this field. Instead, use the ‘Other case
name’ field; see section 33.5 below.
33.4.6.2
Multiple parties
When many persons or entities constitute a party, all of the persons or entities involved
should be listed. Do not just write ‘et al’ (unless ‘et al’ is used in the original decision).
Do not use ‘and ors’ in the Case name fields – instead list all of the parties in full.
Multiple party names within one field should be separated by line-spaces and formatted
into a bullet-point list.
Where two cases are commenced separately and later joined, use the Party names subfields in the Other case name field to list the second case – see section 33.5.1 below).
33.4.6.3
Surnames
Underline the surname (family name, last name) of any party that is an individual person.
Do not underline any other party name.
33.4.6.4
Countries and other jurisdictions as parties
If the country name has changed since the time of the decision/award, please enter the
name used in the original judgment.
Examples
Case
Party 1
Franz J Sedelmayer
name: Party 1
Germany
Nationality
Party 2
Russia
Party 3
Party 3
role
Case
Party 1
 Kav La'Oved (Worker’s Hotline) Association
name:
 The Hotline for Migrant Workers

The Association for Civil Rights in Israel

Physicians for Human Rights

Adva Center for Information on Equality and Social Justice in
- 29 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
Israel
Party 2

Mehuyavut (Commitment to Peace and Social Justice)

Israel

The Minister of Interior

The Minister of Employment and Welfare

The Association of Contractors and Builders

The Plant Growers Agricultural Society Ltd
Party 3
Party 3
role:
33.5 Other case name
This further set of sub-fields is to record any secondary set of parties to a case, or
anything unusual about the structure of the case. If none of the name types below apply
to your case, this field should be left empty.
33.5.1 Name type
The Name type field is used to define the relationship being described. What is the
reason for the alternative case name? Completing this field should not require additional
research; the type of relationship should be clear from the face of the judgment.
You must choose from one of the following options:
- Joining
- Counterclaim
- Cross-claim
- Ship’s name
- Sub nom
- Alternative spelling
- Nickname
- Previously known as
- Amicus Curiae
- Partie Civile
- Foreign language case name
(Give examples for each of these)
‘Joining’ is used when a second case is joined to the first (eg A v B, C v D). The parties
should be listed in the Parties sub-fields of the Other case name field, in the same way as
they would be listed in the Parties sub-field of the main Case name field had they been
parties to the primary case - see section 33.4.6 above, Additional notes on party names.
‘Counterclaim’ is used when Party 2 to the original case makes a claim against Party 1 to
the original case (eg A v B, B v A). The parties should be listed in reverse order to the
way they were listed in the primary case.
‘Cross-claim’ is used when there are multiple parties on one side, and one of those
parties makes a claim against one of the other parties (eg A1 and A2 v B, A1 v A2). The
parties should be listed as though they were on opposing sides.
- 30 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
‘Ship’s name’ is used when a ship is the subject matter of a dispute. List the name in the
relevant Parties sub-fields (see example below)
‘Sub nom’ is used when the case has an alternative, but official, designation. The
alternative designation should be listed in the Party 1 field.
‘Alternative spelling’ is used when it is common for one of the party names to be spelled
in multiple ways. The alternative spelling(s) should be listed in the appropriate Parties
sub-field(s) (see section 3.5.2 below), with multiple entries separated by line-spaces and
formatted into a bullet-point list.
‘Nickname’ is used when there is a common nickname or reference for a case, which is
not part of its official title (eg ‘The Headscarf Case’). The nickname(s) should be listed in
the Parties sub-field(s) (see section 33.5.2 below), with multiple entries separated by
line-spaces and formatted into a bullet-point list.
‘Previously known as’ is used when the case, or the parties in the case, used to be known
by a different name
33.5.2 Party 1, Party 2, etc
Party names should be formulated in the same way as for the case name fields in section
33.4 above.
Example
Case
Party 1
name: Party 2
Party 3
Party 3
role:
Other
Name
case
type:
name: Party 1
Party 2
Party 3
Party 3
role:
Australia
Mary Yarmirr and ors
Joining
Northern Territory
Mary Yarmirr and ors
33.6 Date - MANDATORY
For all cases except arbitral awards reported in IIC, this field will contain the date the
judgment was delivered by the court/tribunal. See section 12 for guidance on the proper
format.
In IIC cases this field should contain the date that the arbitral award or decision was
signed, if that date is available. If, as is sometimes the case in arbitral awards, each
arbitrator signed on different days and multiple dates are therefore listed in the award,
this field would contain only the final date indicated.
Example
Date:
05 November 2003
33.7 Date of despatch to parties
- 31 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
In IIC cases, where no date of signature is provided and the ‘Date’ field above is
therefore empty, this field should contain the date that the decision was despatched to
the parties. See section 12 for guidance on the proper format.
Example
Date of
despatch to
parties:
23 November 2003
33.8 Governing law - MANDATORY
This field will contain the law(s) governing the arbitral or judicial proceedings in the
case—the law applicable to the proceedings.
Also consider including ‘International law’ and the domestic law of a particular country or
countries (eg, ‘Law of Honduras’).
Multiple entries should be separated by line-spaces and formatted into a bullet-point list.
This field should not contain narrative. A more complete description of the governing law
can be given/discussed in the Facts field.
33.8.1 Priority listing
Items are to be listed in order of priority, from most specific and relevant to least
specific and relevant.
In most IIC cases, the first item in this field will be a bilateral investment treaty (BIT).
For decisions brought under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the first
item of governing law will be the NAFTA. For OPIC decisions, insert the contract number,
eg, ‘OPIC Political Risk Insurance Contract No D733’.
33.8.2 Citation mark-up
In this field, the full name of the instrument and its full and complete citation will be
included. Follow the citation format and punctuation rules set out in this Guide. Also be
sure to include Oxford Law Citator mark-up (asterisks, underlining, link types, etc) as
described in section 20 above.
33.8.3 Link types
Any citation in this field will have the link type {governing law}. This link type will be
allocated by default, so reporters need not assign a link type to citations in this field.
Example
Governing
Law:

*Treaty Concerning the Reciprocal Encouragement and Protection
of Investment between the Argentine Republic and the United
States of America 1991 (‘Argentine/US BIT’) (14 November 1991) S
Treaty Doc 103-02, entered into force 20 October 1994*
{governing law}

International law
- 32 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
33.9 Jurisdiction/Court/Chamber/Arbitral Institution - MANDATORY
This field is used to capture multiple types of information which relate to each other in a
hierarchical way. In most cases, this field is likely to contain information in the format:
Jurisdiction, Court, Chamber
However, the last element may often be absent, depending on the structure of the
relevant court. List as much as is relevant of each type of information. Use commas to
separate items.
33.9.1 Jurisdiction
This should come first in the field, as in the example below.
‘Jurisdiction’ in a domestic context will generally refer to the country from which the
decision originated. Jurisdiction may also refer to entities that are not recognised as
‘States’ by the international community but which nevertheless have their own legal
systems, such as Taiwan or the Turkish Cypriot community. See section 16 above for
further guidance. For cases before the Privy Council, which roughly has jurisdiction over
the British Commonwealth, ‘Commonwealth’ is used.
For decisions that originate in a non-domestic court or tribunal, there is no need to
separately enter a jurisdiction (eg, do not write ‘United Nations’ as the jurisdiction for
the International Court of Justice).
33.9.2 Court
‘Court’ refers to the deciding court, for example Supreme Court or House of Lords. This
should appear after the jurisdiction in the field (if the jurisdiction is to be separately
described), as in the example below.
Please see section 17 for further guidance on translating court names into English, and
Appendix X for a country-based list of translated court names.
The Court in this field should be underlined. This formatting will tell the data capture
software that it is a court.
33.9.3 Chamber
‘Chamber’ refers to any specialised division or chamber of the deciding court, for
example, Appeals Chamber or Chancery Division. This should be included after the Court,
as in the example below.
33.9.4 Arbitral institution
List the full and complete name of the Arbitral Institution in this field, if there is one. In
arbitral decisions, there will be no jurisdiction, court, or chamber—the Arbitral Institution
will be the only entry in this field (eg, International Centre for Settlement of Investment
Disputes, or Stockholm Chamber of Commerce).
If there is no arbitral institution, enter ‘Ad hoc arbitration’ in this field.
The Arbitral Institution in this field must be written in bold. This formatting will tell the
data capture software that it is an Arbitral Institution rather than a court.
- 33 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
Do not include abbreviations in this field. However, for OPIC decisions, this field will
contain the word ‘OPIC’.
Examples
Jurisdiction /
International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes
Court /
Chamber/Arbitral
institution:
Jurisdiction /
United Kingdom, High Court of England and Wales, Chancery Division
Court / Chamber/
Arbitral
institution:
33.10 Seat of arbitration - MANDATORY
This field should contain the name of the city that serves as the formal seat of the
arbitration, as specified in the award.
This will not necessarily be the same place as the city in which a tribunal is physically
located (as that may vary, even over the course of a single arbitration). The formal seat
of arbitration will be designated by the parties at the start of the proceedings and will
usually not change.
If the arbitration is conducted under the ICSID Convention, this field should contain
‘N/A’, as the physical seat (always Washington) is of little consequence. However, if the
proceedings are conducted through the ICSID Additional Facility or UNCITRAL, they will
have a specific location, which should be recorded here.
Example
Seat of
arbitration:
Stockholm
33.11 Judges/Arbitrators - MANDATORY
The Judges/Arbitrators field is made up of a number of sub-fields, used to provide the
full and complete details of the judges or arbitrators in the case, and the status of their
opinions if relevant.
33.11.1 Name
This sub-field is used to list the names of the judges/arbitrators in full, regardless of how
they appear in the decision.
List each judge/arbitrator in the order in which they appear in the decision, rather than
alphabetically. Use a separate line for each name rather than separating by commas or
semicolons. Please insert as many additional rows as required in the template to allow for
multiple judges.
List titles only as they attach to the individual outside of their capacity as
judge/arbitrator in the decision under consideration.
- 34 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
Surnames must be underlined.
You do not need to state the signatory of an OPIC decision.
33.11.2 Nationality
List the nationality of each judge/arbitrator, EXCEPT in ILDC and ICL, where reporters
should leave the nationality blank. Countries should be listed according to the common
name rather than the full official name (see section 16 for further guidance).
33.11.3 Role
If a judge has a particular function in the context of the case, indicate that function in
this sub-field, exactly as it is shown in the judgment. Common examples include Presiding
or President, Chief Justice, or Judge ad hoc.
For IIC arbitration cases, enter in this sub-field the role that each arbitrator played in the
proceedings. You must choose from one of the following options:
- President
- Claimant appointment
- Respondent appointment
- Co-arbitrator (only if the course of appointment is not clear)
If an arbitrator has been replaced at any stage of the award, only the role played in the
award on which the headnote is being written should be listed, and full details should be
provided in the Commentary section.
If an arbitrator has been specifically appointed by a certain body (usually a President)
this can be discussed in the Facts section, or very briefly in the Role field if it is vital to
the composition of the tribunal.
33.11.4 Opinion
If a judge/arbitrator has written a separate opinion of any kind, indicate the nature of
that separate opinion in this sub-field, exactly as it is shown in the judgment. Common
examples include: Dissenting, Dissenting opinion, Concurring, Concurring opinion, or
simply Separate opinion. List all of the judges that joined in a particular opinion, and
indicate the separate opinion for each judge that joined.
Example
Judges /
Arbitrators:
Name
Justice
Staffan
Magnusson
Jan Peter
Wachler
Professor Ivan
S Zykin
Nationality
Sweden
Role
President
Germany
Claimant
appointment
Respondent
appointment
Russia
Opinion
Dissenting
33.12 Counsel for Party 1 - MANDATORY
This field is used to record the full name of each counsel.
List titles only as they attach to the individual outside of their capacity as counsel in the
decision under consideration.
- 35 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
Directly after each name and separated from it by a semicolon, list each counsel’s
affiliation, even if multiple individuals work at the same firm or organization.
Surnames should be underlined.
Multiple entries should be separated by line-spaces and formatted into a bullet-point list.
Example
Counsel for Party
1:
Mr Kaj Hobér; Mannheimer Swartling Advokatbyrå, Stockholm
33.13 Counsel for Party 2 - MANDATORY
Follow the instructions for Counsel for Party 1 above.
Example
Counsel for Party
2:

Mr P P Borodin

Mr V E Savchenko

Mrs Alla V Kchoroshilova

Mrs Galina; Russian Procurement Department
33.14 Arbitral rules - MANDATORY
For IIC decisions and awards, this field should contain the full name of the applicable
Rules, followed by the full and complete citation.
Follow the citation format and punctuation rules set out above, and include Oxford Law
Citator mark up (asterisks, link underlining etc) as detailed in section 20 above.
Example
Arbitral Rules:
*Arbitral Rules of the United Nations Commission on International
Trade Law, GAOR, 31st Session Supplement No 17, UN Doc A/31/17
(1976)* {mentioned} (UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules)
33.15 Procedural stage - MANDATORY
In this field, detail the current procedural stage/level of the reported proceeding, as
briefly as possible.
If the procedural stage also forms part of the citation, list the procedural stage exactly as
it would be shown in the citation.
Use English terms wherever possible. Do not include narrative in this field. Do not include
any Citator mark-up in this field.
Examples
Procedural
stage:
Final Award on Jurisdiction, merits, and damages
33.16 Previous stages
- 36 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
This field should list the most important or relevant previous procedural stages of the
case, in chronological order. Only previous stages in the same case or set of proceedings
should be included here. In general you should only list stages which ended in a decision.
Multiple entries should be separated by line-spaces and formatted into a bullet-point list.
Use English terms wherever possible. Do not write a narrative for this field. A more
complete description of the procedural history of the case can be discussed in the Facts
or Commentary fields.
If there were no previous stages, leave this field blank. Do not write ‘None’.
33.16.1 Citations
Directly after each stage and separated from it by a semicolon, list the full and complete
citation for that stage. Follow the citation format and punctuation rules/examples set
out above, and include Oxford Law Citator mark up (asterisks, underlining etc) as
detailed in section 20 above.
If the stage is not one that would normally carry its own citation, such as an initial
application or complaint, then simply omit the citation. If the stage is one that would
normally carry its own citation, such as an order or decision, but has not been reported,
then write (unreported), including as much information as possible, such as the name of
the court, date of decision etc.
33.16.2 Link types
The link type will be allocated by default, so reporters need not assign a link type to
citations in this field.
Examples
Previous
stages:
*Azurix Corp v Argentina, Decision on Jurisdiction, ICSID Case No
ARB/01/12, IIC 23 (2003); 43 ILM 262, signed 8 December 2003*
33.17 Subsequent stages
This field lists the most important or relevant subsequent procedural stages of the
reported case, in chronological order.
This field should only list subsequent stages in the same case or set of proceedings.
Multiple entries should be separated by line-spaces and formatted into a bullet-point list.
Use English terms wherever possible. Do not write a narrative for this field. A more
complete description of the procedural progress of the case can be discussed in the
Commentary field.
If there have been no subsequent stages, leave this field blank. Do not write ‘None’. If no
appeal is available, include this information in this field.
Reporters must alert the relevant Managing Editor or OUP Project Editor to any changes
in the status of a case.
33.17.1 Citations
Citations in the Subsequent stages field are formulated in the same way as for the
Previous stages field in section 33.16 above.
- 37 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
3.17.2 Link types
The link type will be allocated by default, so reporters need not assign a link type to
citations in this field.
Examples

Subsequent
stages:


*Judgment of the City Court of Stockholm, [full citation needed]
18 December 2002*
*Judgment of the Svea Court of Appeal (Svea Hovrätt) 15 June
2005 [full citation needed]*
*Decision of the German Supreme Court on enforceability,
Bundesgerichtshof, Karlsruhe, Germany, 4 October 2005 [full
citation needed]*
33.18 Related developments
This field is used to list the most significant related developments in the case, in
chronological order.
This may include, for example, appeals of a domestic case to an international or
supranational body such as the European Court of Justice or European Court of Human
Rights, or subsequent legislation striking down or altering the effect of a particular case.
Such types of short descriptive information should be added as a parenthetical, in round
brackets, after the full and complete citation, so that the information remains in list
form.
This field, unlike the Previous Stages and Subsequent Stages fields, can include
developments that occurred both before and after the full case under consideration.
Multiple entries should be separated by line-spaces and formatted into a bullet-point list.
Use English terms wherever possible. Do not write a narrative for this field. A more
complete description of the related developments in the case can be discussed in the
Commentary field.
33.18.1 Citations
Citations in the Related developments field are formulated in the same way as for the
Previous stages field in section 33.16 above.
33.18.2 Link types
The link type will be allocated by default, so reporters need not assign a link type to
citations in this field.
Examples
Related
developments:

The European Court of Human Rights transmitted its judgment to the
Committee of Ministers on 21 February 1975, which urged action
from the United Kingdom

New procedures were introduced in all prison department
establishments in England and Wales
*Malhous v Czech Republic (dec) [GC] no 33071/96, 13 December 2000,
ECHR 2000-XII* (subsequent appeal by Malhous to the European Court of
Human Rights on related international law issues)
- 38 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
33.19 Key subjects - MANDATORY
List the appropriate Key subjects, as taken from the Key subjects list. This is a short list
of broad areas. Every case should fit into at least one subject and may well fit into more
than one. Editors/OUP may amend this selection as necessary to maintain a consistent
use of the Key subjects across all of the cases in a particular service, and across different
Oxford Law online services.
List the Key subjects in alphabetical order, and exactly as they are shown on the list.
Multiple entries should be separated by line-spaces and formatted into a bullet-point list.
The list of Key subjects can be found in Appendix A. This list is closed and is not subject
to revision.
Example
Key subjects: 

International criminal law
Law of treaties
33.20 Keywords - MANDATORY
List the appropriate Keywords, as taken from the Keywords list and exactly as they are
shown on that list.
This is a longer list of more specific terms than the Key subjects. It is likely that several
Keywords will apply to any given case. Editors/OUP may amend this selection as
necessary to maintain a consistent use of the Keywords across all of the cases in a
particular service, and across different Oxford Law online services.
List the Keywords in alphabetical order. Multiple entries should be separated by linespaces and formatted into a bullet-point list.
The list of Keywords can be found in Appendix B. The ILDC list of Keywords, which
contains suggestions as to which Keywords to consider using together, can be found in
Appendix X.
This list is closed. Most issues will fit within an existing Keyword, even if it is not an exact
match. If you cannot find an appropriate Keyword, proposed new keywords should be
listed in this field, followed by the phrase ‘(proposed new keyword)’ in bold and
highlighted in yellow. The suggested keyword must describe an idea or issue that is
central and vital to describing the decision under consideration. Suggestions for new
Keywords will only be taken under consideration by the Editors/OUP in rare instances.
Example
Keywords:







Customary international law
Extradition and mutual assistance
Guilty plea (proposed new keyword)
Human rights
Human rights, civil and political rights
Human rights, right to a judge
Human rights, right to life
- 39 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide


Oct -07
State practice
Treaties, interpretation
33.21 Core issue(s) - MANDATORY
This field should contain a one-sentence summary of the international law questions
raised by the case before the court.
A Core issue should always be formatted as a sentence starting with ‘Whether . . .’, ‘How
much . . .’, ‘To what extent . . .’ etc, and end with a full point rather than a question
mark. For ILDC cases, the Core issue will always start with ‘Whether...’
Multiple entries should be separated by line-spaces and formatted into a numbered list.
Examples
Core
issue(s):
Whether persons lured out of their State by means of entrapment can be
extradited.
Core
issue(s):
1. Whether the Gaza Strip was under a separate occupation from the
West Bank so that reassignment of residence from one area to the other
amounts to deportation under international law.
2. Whether the Military Commander has acted outside of his discretion
under international humanitarian law in reassigning residence.
33.22 Facts - MANDATORY
This field should contain a brief summary of the factual background of the case,
including:
(1) the events giving rise to it;
(2) the main arguments of the parties/counsel to the extent that they relate to
international law; or noting that the parties did not (seem to) argue international law.
(3) the relevant procedural history of the case up until the point of the reported
proceedings; and
(4) the damages or form of relief sought.
Paragraphs in the facts field are numbered ‘F1’, ‘F2’, ‘F3’, etc. Write in the past tense
wherever possible.
References to any other document apart from the judgment (eg, another case, a
document, or piece of evidence), should be given in the form of a citation. Follow the
citation format and punctuation rules set out above, and include Oxford Law Citator
mark-up (asterisks, underlining, link types, etc) as described in section 20 above.
33.22.1 Links to the judgment
It may, very occasionally, be appropriate to refer to the judgment in the Facts field. If
so, a link reference to a specific paragraph and/or section of the judgment must be
provided. OUP will turn this reference into a hyperlink, where possible, to bring the
reader directly to the relevant part of the judgment. Follow the detailed instructions in
section 33.23.2 below when adding link references.
Example
- 40 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Facts:
Oct -07
F1 In January 2003, two Yemeni citizens—an Imam and his secretary—
were lured out of Yemen by an under-cover agent of the United States
(US). The US accused them of having instigated terrorist acts. The two
Yemenis arrived at Frankfurt Airport where they were arrested on the
basis of an arrest warrant issued by the US Federal District Court for the
Eastern District of New York.
F2 The Republic of Yemen intervened before the German authorities,
arguing that the two Yemeni citizens had been abducted in violation of
international law, and demanded that Germany return them to Yemen.
F3 In May 2003, the US issued an assurance that the two Yemeni citizens
would not be tried before a military court, according to a *US
Presidential Order of 13 November 2001* {discussed}.
F4 After some preliminary decisions, the Higher Regional Court declared
the extradition admissible by an *Order of 18 July 2003* {mentioned}. The
arrestees raised a number of claims against this decision before the
Higher Regional Court, which rejected them in its *Order of 19 August
2003 (citation not available)* {mentioned}.
F5 Against that decision, the two Yemeni citizens brought an individual
constitutional complaint before the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC),
claiming that the Higher Regional Court had been under an obligation to
submit to the FCC the question of whether there exists a general rule in
international law prohibiting the extradition of persons abducted from
their home country.
F6 This obligation to submit a question concerning international norms
was said to be based on *Article 100, para 2, of the German Constitution
(Art 100 Abs 2 GG)* {discussed} (Basic Law), according to which an
ordinary court shall make a preliminary referral if there are doubts about
the existence or non-existence of a rule in customary international law.
(This does not encompass treaty rules.)
F7 Additionally, the two Yemeni citizens argued that the failure to
request a preliminary ruling constituted a violation of a person’s right to
a judge, which is a fundamental right (*Article 101, para 1, of the Basic
Law (Art 101 Abs 1 GG)* {discussed}).
F8 Further, the two Yemeni citizens claimed that the FCC should decide
(a) whether there was a rule excluding the use of information supplied by
an under-cover agent, and (b) whether there existed an international rule
prohibiting an arrest for unlimited duration, as permitted by the *US
Presidential Order of 13 November 2001* {discussed}. The Yemenis,
believing that such a rule existed, claimed that their right to physical
integrity and their right to life had been violated by the impugned
decision of the Higher Regional Court, and, moreover, that their right to
freedom had been violated by that court’s failure to verify the factual
basis for the demand for extradition.
F9 Finally, the Yemeni citizens claimed that their right to life and
physical integrity required an inquiry into whether the extradition might
41 - forms of inhumane treatment.
expose them to torture and- other
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
33.23 Held - MANDATORY
This field contains a brief summary of the relevant International law holdings in the case
(ie, the legal decision(s) in the context of the facts of the case).
The text in this field should show clearly how the court resolved the Core Issue(s) and
how it responded to the main arguments summarised in the Facts. It is not enough to
simply repeat a procedural holding or ‘dispositive’ of a judgment (such as, eg ‘first cause
of action denied’).
In this field you should avoid language such as ‘The Court held that …’. Instead, holdings
should be stated in the form of a rule of law, and may be either quoted directly or
paraphrased: ‘International immunity ratione personae of a foreign head of State
constitutes an obstacle to his prosecution in Belgium’.
Generally, follow the order in which the court decided the issues, although to focus
clearly on international law matters and omit purely domestic findings, you may need to
reorder the holdings slightly. Put the main focus on the most relevant holdings.
Paragraphs in this field are numbered ‘H1’, ‘H2’, ‘H3’, etc. Write in the past tense
wherever possible.
References to any other document apart from the judgment (eg, another case or a piece
of legislation), should be given in the form of a citation. Follow the citation format and
punctuation rules set out above, and include Oxford Law Citator mark-up (asterisks,
underlining, link types, etc) as described in section 20 above. These references will also
be linked to the Oxford Law Citator.
33.23.1 Separate opinions
Separate opinions of any kind (eg, dissenting, concurring, individual) that discuss relevant
points should also be summarized. Continue consecutively numbering paragraphs as ‘H4’,
‘H5’, etc; do not re-start numbering. The discussion of a separate opinion can continue
over multiple paragraphs.
The opening phrase of the first paragraph discussing a separate opinion should be
underlined and written in one of the following formats: ‘Judge Smith, dissenting:’ or
‘Jones, Arbitrator, in an individual opinion:’.
33.23.2 Links to the judgment
In the Held field it is appropriate to paraphrase and summarise short passages from the
judgment, with a link reference to a specific paragraph and/or section of the judgment.
OUP will turn this reference into a hyperlink, where possible, to bring the reader directly
to the relevant part of the judgment.
There is no need to include lengthy extracts from judgments in the headnote. As a rule of
thumb, any verbatim quotes from the judgment should not go on for more than three
lines. If the extract is longer than this, a link reference should be given instead.
Link references must always be in bold type and surrounded by square brackets
33.23.2.1 Where the judgment already contains numbered paragraphs
If the judgment already contains numbered paragraphs, the link reference in the
headnote should be to the relevant numbered paragraph(s): ‘[para XX]’ or ‘[paras XXXX]’.
- 42 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
Link references should be unambiguous. That is, there should not be more than one place
in the judgment where the link might go (eg if the link reference is to [para 27], it needs
to be clear that there is only one paragraph in the judgment with this number).
There is no need to insert a link place-marker in the judgment file or document.
33.23.2.2 Where the judgment does not already contain numbered paragraphs
If the judgment does not already contain numbered paragraphs, the wording of the link
reference depends on the type of file in which the judgment is sourced.
If the judgment file is in Word or some other editable electronic format: the reporter
should phrase the link reference as ‘[link 1]’, ‘[link 2]’, etc. The reporter must then
insert identical link place-markers in the Word judgment file at the appropriate
location(s). Link place-markers should be placed at the start of the passage being linked.
If the judgment file is in PDF or some other non-editable electronic format: the reporter
must provide enough information in the link reference so that OUP can identify the
relevant passage in the judgment. The link reference should normally be in one of the
following formats: ‘[link 1, p 17, paragraph beginning ‘It is a feature of modern acts of
Parliament…’]’, or ‘[link 2, section IV.A.1, paragraph beginning ‘Overwegende dat
noch uit artikel 6 EVRM…’]’. No link place-marker can be inserted into the PDF.
If the judgment file is only in hard copy or paper: the reporter should phrase the link
reference as ‘[link 1]’, ‘[link 2]’, etc. The reporter must then physically insert identical
link place-markers on the hard copy by hand at the appropriate location(s). Link placemarkers should be placed at the start of the passage to which you are linking.
Examples
Held:
H1 There is no norm in public international law which prohibits the
extradition of persons who have been lured out of their home country by
the use of entrapment. [para 53]
H2 The individual constitutional complaints were rejected. The Higher
Regional Court had violated its obligation to submit the case to the
Federal Constitutional Court according to *Article 100, para 2, of the
Basic Law* {discussed}, but this failure did not entail a violation of
*Article 101 of the Basic Law* {discussed}. A violation of that
fundamental right could only be found if the deprivation of a judge
guaranteed by law had an impact on the outcome of the proceedings.
This was not an issue in the present case, as the FCC would have reached
the same conclusion in answering the preliminary question of whether a
rule existed prohibiting an extradition of persons lured out of their
country. [para 48]
H3 In extradition cases regulated by extradition treaties, the national
authorities normally were not required to inquire into whether the
request for extradition was well founded. Such examination would take
place only if there was evidence that the request for extradition was
abusive. [para 64]
H4 It did not constitute a violation of the right to freedom and the right
to physical integrity to extradite a person to the US without investigating
the methods of interrogation in that country. The principle of trust which
applies in cases of extradition based on a treaty means that the State
requesting the extradition is presumed to respect the rule of law as long
- 43 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
as facts do not raise doubts in this respect. The US had issued a
guarantee that the *Presidential Order of 13 November 2001* {discussed}
would not apply in this case, and that persons to be extradited would not
be tried before a special military court. [para 74]
Held:
H1 Both appeals were dismissed.
H2 Neither international nor domestic law supported the proposition that
no rights deriving from or relating to events occurring or places lying
beyond low-water mark could be enforced in Australian courts. The
territorial sea was not and never had been a lawless place and the courts
had long given effect to rights and duties derived from transactions and
events which had occurred in the territorial sea. [paras 21-2]
H3 Native title rights and interests were not derived from the common
law. The *Act* {mentioned} clearly presupposed that these rights and
interests could and would operate together with the common law as long
as there was no inconsistency between the two. [para 36]
H4 At no time before federation had the Imperial authorities asserted any
claim of ownership to the territorial seas or sea-bed contrary to
international law. Thus, the prerogative rights acquired by the Crown in
relation to the territorial sea, at the time of acquisition of sovereignty
over Australia, were limited by the ancient public right of fishing in the
seas and in tidal waters and the public right of navigation. There was no
necessary inconsistency between the rights and interests asserted by the
Imperial authorities and the continued recognition of native title rights
and interests. [paras 53-6]
H5 Nothing in the international or domestic application of the legal
regimes for the territorial sea and sea-bed areas was inconsistent with
the common law of Australia recognising native title rights and interests
in relation to the sea or sea-bed in the area claimed. [paras 53-6]
H6 However, regardless of when the right of innocent passage came to be
regarded as forming part of customary international law, the right of
innocent passage and the recognised rights of fishing and navigation were
inconsistent with an exclusive right under Aboriginal law or custom to
occupy, use, enjoy and possess the waters of the delimitation area. The
native title rights and interests recognised were therefore non-exclusive
rights of use and enjoyment. [paras 80-5]
H7 Justice McHugh, dissenting in part: The Commonwealth’s appeal
should be allowed. The *Act* {mentioned} only recognised rights and
interests that had been recognised by the common law when sovereignty
over the relevant area was acquired. The area claimed had been part of
the high seas at the time of Australia’s acquisition of sovereignty. As no
state could claim sovereignty over the high seas, the common law could
not then have recognised or enforced any native title rights and
interests. [paras 104-9]
- 44 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
H8 Dominion over the territorial sea and sea-bed was the province of
Parliament and not the common law, which did not operate beyond the
low-water mark. [para 179]
H9 There was nothing in international law that recognised native title
rights as a burden on the sovereignty a coastal state has over its
territorial sea. Therefore, in the absence of Parliamentary intervention
no one could now acquire a legal right in relation to the territorial sea,
sea-bed, and sub-soil that the common law courts could enforce. [para
233]
33.24 Commentary
This field is for the OUP Commentary, which will often be written by the reporter, or
sometimes by a separate commentator. Not all headnotes will have Commentary
attached.
Where Commentary is present, it should contain a brief analysis of the international law
issues presented and decided in the case. The analysis should provide a proper context
for the judgment, so that a user who is unfamiliar with the jurisdiction or issues in
question can understand the holdings and quickly assess why the case is (or is not)
relevant for a particular question of international law.
Separate opinions of any kind can be commented upon if they are of interest to the
international law question(s) in the case.
The maximum length of each Commentary is 1000 words. In exceptional circumstances,
this word limit can be extended at the discretion of the Editors/OUP, if it is considered
necessary for presenting the international law aspects of the case properly.
Paragraphs in this field are numbered ‘C1’, ‘C2’, ‘C3’, etc. Please write Commentary in
the past tense wherever possible.
References to any other document apart from the judgment (eg, another case, a
document, or piece of evidence), should be given in the form of a citation. Follow the
citation format and punctuation rules set out above, and include Oxford Law Citator
mark-up (asterisks, underlining, link types, etc) as described in section 20 above.
33.24.1 Writing a good Commentary
Commentary should be written by reporters/reviewers. A good Commentary will explain
and comment upon the Court’s handling of the Core issue(s). It will not repeat the facts
of the case. Rather, the broader context (political/historical/societal) in which the case
arose should be briefly explained.
Please see the specific guidance on writing Commentary for each module, in the Annexes
to this document. For example, In ILDC headnotes, a short explanation or discussion of
the relevant domestic law arguments may be necessary, as the international law
arguments may be closely tied to domestic law.
Commentary should focus on how the court dealt with the international law arguments,
whether it addressed the parties’ arguments, or decided on its own to apply international
law. It may also assess the court’s application or interpretation of international law in the
- 45 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
case: Where arguments were novel, interesting, weak, or unfounded, this should be
pointed out.
Ask whether the judgment is in accord with generally held interpretations? Is it novel,
does it depart from a previous trend or follow existing jurisprudence?
Is the judgment well reasoned? Is it a sophisticated interpretation, a surprising one, or
one which shows a lack of understanding of—or deliberate disregard for—the international
law principles at stake?
What questions remain from the international law perspective, ie, which issues did the
court leave aside, or refuse to decide?
Has there been any subsequent mention or discussion of the case in decisions by
international courts or tribunals, or by the national courts of other countries? The most
significant of these should have been listed in the ‘Related Developments’ field.
Finally, the Commentary should address the overall significance of the case from an
international law perspective, noting, for example, whether it confirms or departs from
established principles pertaining to the international legal issue in question.
33.24.2 Links to the judgment
The instructions for the Held field above apply when linking to the judgment from the
Commentary field.
33.24.3 Link types
Remember that this is one of the fields in which reporters may be required to assign a
link type; see section 20.2. If one of the items cited in this field does not appear
anywhere else in the headnote, and is not mentioned or discussed anywhere in the main
decision but instead is only mentioned by the reporter, the reporter must give it a link
type of {mentioned only in headnote}.
If the Commentary itself discusses further commentary which is also listed in the Further
Commentary field (see section 33.25 below), it should still get the {mentioned only in
headnote} link type.
33.24.4 Commentary in IIC headnotes
In IIC cases, the Commentary field may be blank in headnotes of minor stages, save for a
link to the Commentary for the headnote of the main stage (eg, the headnote for a
Procedural Order could link to the commentary of the Final Award headnote). If this is so,
the main Commentary should discuss all stages that link to it. Please let the Project
Editor know if you are not reporting all the stages in an award.
Example
Commentary: C1 This decision answered certain questions in the field of extradition
law. For a long time, the principle of ‘male captus bene detentus’
prevailed in international law. According to this principle, because an
arrest of a person made in violation of international law would not have
an impact on the legality of a trial against that person, an extradition of
such person was also considered lawful. However, in recent times, the
attitude of courts in this field has changed, and it has become
- 46 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
increasingly accepted that forceful abduction of a person from a State’s
territory without the consent of that State not only violates the principle
of sovereignty, but at the same time precludes a trial of the abducted
person.
C2 The Federal Constitutional Court expressly refused to decide on this
issue, although it mentioned State practice that goes in this direction.
C3 The circumstances of the present case, however, differed on a
principal point, as the question to be decided was whether a person
could be extradited who had not been ‘forcefully abducted’ but rather
‘lured out of his home country by entrapment’ and therefore left the
country voluntarily. With respect to such a situation, State practice is far
from unanimous; in the majority of cases, however, neither a trial nor an
extradition would be refused.
C4 The Court therefore correctly concluded that there exists no norm
prohibiting extradition of a person lured from his home country.
C4 The Court, in keeping with prior jurisprudence, made a further
important remark concerning the principle of trust in extradition cases. It
embraced a restriction of control of the reasons given in justification of
extradition and the reliance on guarantees given by foreign governments.
The principle of trust is a prerequisite of mutual legal assistance, which
will not work unless mutual trust is shown.
33.25 Further commentary
This field is used to list any secondary sources that discuss the judgment being reported,
such as law journal articles, case notes or books. This field should contain only citations,
as opposed to narrative or evaluation.
List the items in reverse chronological order. Multiple entries should be separated by linespaces and formatted into a bullet-point list.
33.25.1 Citations
Follow the citation format and punctuation rules set out above, and include Oxford Law
Citator mark-up (asterisks, underlining, link types, etc) as described in section 20 above.
Remember that the titles of journal articles and other published commentaries are not
italicized under Oxford Law online style rules. Instead, they are contained within single
quotation marks. Only the title of the article should be linked, and therefore only this
part should be underlined. However, the author will be cited in front of the title, so the
first asterisk of the citation mark up should still be placed before the name of the author.
33.25.2 Link types
The link type will be allocated by default, so reporters need not assign a link type to
citations in this field.
Example
Further

*Matthias Hartwig, ‘The German Federal Constitutional Court and
- 47 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
commentary:
Oct -07
the Extradition of Alleged Terrorists to the United States’ (2004) 5
German Law Journal 64*

*Roy Goode and others, ‘Transnational Commercial Law:
International Instruments and Commentary’ (OUP, Oxford 2004)*

*HLA Hart, ‘Essays in Jurisprudence and Philosophy’ (OUP, Oxford
1983)*
33.26 Instruments cited
This field is used to list all instruments that were cited in the judgment. Use the
underlined headings shown below, as appropriate:
 International
 Domestic
 Constitutions
Exception: In ILDC headnotes only, domestic instruments should be excluded from this
field—only international instruments (treaties, agreements, conventions, declarations,
resolutions, etc) and domestic constitutions mentioned in the judgment should be
included. Irrelevant or over-extensive domestic citation is a distraction for ILDC users.
All such instruments cited in the judgment only must be listed here, even if the reference
seems insignificant. Instruments that are discussed only in the headnote (including the
Commentary) should not be added to this field.
List instruments in chronological order. For a list of common treaties and their full Oxford
Law online citations and abbreviations, please refer to Appendix C.
33.26.1 Citations
Follow the citation format and punctuation rules set out above.
Include any and all exact references to provisions that are cited in the judgment at the
end of the full and complete citation. Capitalize and spell out references to ‘Article’,
‘Rule’, ‘Section’, ‘Paragraph’, etc.
33.26.2 Linking
Include Oxford Law Citator mark-up (asterisks, underlining, link types, etc) as described
in section 20 above. Remember that this is one of the fields (the other being Cases cited)
in which the reporter must assign a link type to every citation. In addition, each
individual provision will be linked separately to the Oxford Law Citator, which means that
each provision as well as the main citation will be individually marked up.
Examples
Instruments
cited:
Instruments
cited:
*Extradition treaty between the Federal Republic of Germany and the
United States of America (20 June 1978) and supplementary treaty of 21
October 1986* {discussed}

*Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of
Genocide (9 December 1948) 78 UNTS 227, entered into force 12
January 1951* {mentioned}
- 48 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide






Oct -07
*Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War
(12 August 1949) 75 UNTS 135, entered into force 21 October 1950*
{mentioned}, *Articles 129* {mentioned}, *130* {mentioned}
*Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons
in Time of War (12 August 1949) 75 UNTS 287, entered into force
21 October 1950* {mentioned}, *Articles 146*, *147* {mentioned}
*Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental
Freedoms (4 November 1950) 213 UNTS 222, entered into force 3
September 1953* {mentioned}, *Articles 2*, *3*, *4*, *7*
{mentioned}
*Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949,
and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed
Conflicts (8 June 1977) 1125 UNTS 3, entered into force 7
December 1979* {mentioned}
*Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia, UN Doc S/RES/827 (1994)* {mentioned}, *Article 7.4*
{mentioned}
*Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (17 July 1998)
UN Doc A/CONF.183/9, entered into force 1 July 2002*
{mentioned}, *Articles 17*, *33* {mentioned}
33.27 Cases cited
This field is used to list all cases, whether international or domestic, which are cited in
the main decision.
Exception: In ILDC headnotes only, only list important decisions of domestic courts from
the same jurisdiction as the reported case, if the court relied upon them as relevant to
the international law issue at hand. Also list all cited decisions from other domestic
jurisdictions, on the basis that it is always important to ILDC users when one domestic
court has cited the courts of another country.
All cases from one court (if international) or country (if domestic) should be grouped
together under an underlined heading, such as International Court of Justice or Israel. Do
not abbreviate names of courts; countries should be listed according to the common
name rather than the full official name (see section 16 for further guidance).
List cases within each heading in chronological order.
First list international courts and tribunals, arranged in alphabetical order by court. Then
list domestic cases, arranged in alphabetical order by country.
33.27.1 Citations
Follow the citation format and punctuation rules set out above.
33.27.2 Linking
Include Oxford Law Citator mark-up (asterisks, underlining, link types, etc) as described
in section 20 above. Remember that this is one of the fields (the other being Instruments
cited) in which the reporter must assign a link type to every citation.
- 49 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Oct -07
Example
Cases cited:
European Court of Human Rights
 *Balogh v Hungary (just satisfaction) no 47940/99, 20 July 2004*
{mentioned}
European Court of Justice
 *Fixtures Marketing Ltd v OPAP Case C-444/02, [2004] ECR I-10365*
{mentioned}
International Court of Justice
 *Corfu Channel (United Kingdom v Albania) Merits, Judgment, ICJ
Rep 1949 (9 April) p 4; ICGJ 199 (ICJ 1949)* {mentioned}
 *Land, Island and Maritime Frontier Case (El Salvador/Honduras,
Nicaragua intervening) Application for Intervention, Judgment, ICJ
Rep 1990 (13 September) p 92; ICGJ 99 (ICJ 1990)* {mentioned}
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia
 *Prosecutor v Dokmanović, Decision on Motion for Provisional
Release by a Trial Chamber, Case No IT-95-13a-PT ICTY (22
October 1997)* {mentioned}
 *Prosecutor v Nikolić, Decision on Interlocutory Appeal Concerning
Legality of Arrest, Case No IT-94-2-AR73 ICTY (5 June 2003)*
{mentioned}
Canada
 *Re Hartnett and the Queen [1973] 14 CCC 6* {mentioned}
United States
 *United States v Wilson 721 F2d 967 (4th Cir 1983)* {mentioned}
 *United States v Alvarez-Machain 504 US 655 (1992)* {mentioned}
33.28 Reporter - MANDATORY
This field is used to record the full name of the person writing the headnote. Please
underline the surname.
No institutional affiliations should be included. Each name will link directly to the
Reporter’s CV and/or page on the Oxford Law Citator.
Example
Reporter:
Joseph Powderly
33.29 Reporter date - MANDATORY
This field should contain the date that the reporter approved the headnote for
publication. This will be the date on which the reporter submits the draft, whether a first
draft (eg, before peer review) or final draft (eg, after peer review). Thus, this field must
always be filled in, whether the report has been fully finalized or not.
See section 12 for rules on the proper date format.
Example
- 50 -
Oxford Law Online Style, Citation, and Template Guide
Report date:
Oct -07
04 April 2007
33.30 Commentator
If there is Commentary in the headnote, this field should contain the name of the person
writing the Commentary, but only if the Commentator is a different person from the
Reporter.
Do not include any institutional affiliation. Each name will link directly to the
Commentator’s CV and/or Oxford Law Citator page.
Example
Commentator: William Schabas
33.31 Commentary date
If there is Commentary included in the headnote, then this field should contain the date
that the Commentary was approved by the Commentator.
This field allows the reader to date the opinions expressed in the Commentary, so even if
the Reporter and Commentator are one and the same, the Reporter date field is
completed, the Commentary date field should still be filled in. This is so even if the
Commentary was approved by the Reporter on the same date as the rest of the headnote
(ie, the Reporter date and Commentary date fields show the same date).
See section 12 for rules on the proper date format.
Example
Commentary
date:
30 March 2007
- 51 -