Jurisdictional immunity of foreign central banks: international and national regulation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is indicated that the international community is developing various approaches to establishing the boundaries and content of jurisdictional immunity, which are based on relevant international agreements. A number of foreign countries have adopted specialized legislative acts regulating the issue of jurisdictional immunity of central banks of other states. In some legal systems, the provisions on the immunity of foreign states are set out in general terms, which imposes on the courts the obligation to interpret them in detail, which significantly increases the relevance of the issue of jurisdictional immunity of central banks. The article examines current trends in the development of jurisdictional immunity of foreign central banks in the context of state immunity. The status of central banks, their functions, and property relations are defined. The peculiarities of central banks as participants in international private law relations are revealed, and attention is paid to the legal regulation of immunity issues in these relations. From the perspective of comparative law, foreign experience is examined, and the peculiarities of the legal regulation of the status of central banks in legal systems and their immunity are studied. Judicial practice in private law relations and problems of resolving disputes are analyzed. The article examines the legal regime of jurisdictional immunity of foreign central banks in the context of private international law. Approaches to determining the legal status of a central bank, its participation in cross-border private law relations, and the limits of judicial immunity are analyzed. The author examines in detail the concept of limited immunity and its implementation in international treaties and the legislation of foreign states (the US, the UK, Canada, China, etc.). Particular attention is paid to court practice regarding the seizure of central bank assets, particularly in cases where they engage in commercial activities. The need to develop Ukrainian legislation in this area, taking into account international experience and financial security needs, is emphasized.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it