The Third Year Episode and Part II Papers | CULSCAST Conversations Episode 6

Without the ability to mobilise coercive measures, international adjudicators must rely on their authority to influence real-world outcomes. This lecture considers the origin and conceivable uses of the authority of international adjudicators. International courts’ influence relies on their ability to mobilise, through mere authoritative communications, the different internal and external forces that shape state behaviour, influencing the views of individuals within states and shaping mutual expectations of cooperative and sanction-worthy behaviour. For this, international courts have at their disposal a variety of communicative instruments: their judicial remedies. Though all judicial remedies are, at their core, modalities of interpretation and application of norms, their varied focuses allow adjudicators to calibrate the exercise of their authority. The lecture develops on concepts outlined in Dr. Vidigal’s 2026 monograph, Adjudicating over Anarchy: Judicial Remedies, Compliance, and Enforcement in International Law (Cambridge University Press). The book establishes a fourfold typology of international judicial remedies – Mere Adjudication, Declaration of Breach, Consequential Duties, and Permissible Responses – each targeting a specific element of the international normative framework. Through different remedies, adjudicators interpret the normative framework, establish violations, and determine conduct required to restore lawful relations. The fourth category of remedies, often left untapped, encompasses judicial determinations of permissible responses to breach: what measures other actors may take to respond to violations, compelling wrongdoers to comply with their obligations and provide redress for injury. If fully explored, this fourth category might reshape the prevailing understanding of the relationship between international adjudication and coercive enforcement. Geraldo Vidigal is Associate Professor at the University of Amsterdam, where he coordinates the LL.M. in International Trade and Investment Law. He is Editor-in-Chief of Legal Issues of Economic Integration, sits on the Editorial Boards of the Journal of International Economic Law and the Latin American and Caribbean Journal of International Law, and is a member of the Executive Council of the Society of International Economic Law. He holds a PhD in Law (University of Cambridge), a Master’s in International Law and International Organisations (Sorbonne – Paris 1), and a Bachelor’s in Law (University of São Paulo). He has been a Senior Research Fellow at the Max Planck Institute in Luxembourg, and a Jean Monnet Fellow at the European University Institute, and a Dispute Settlement Lawyer at the World Trade Organization. Besides Adjudicating over Anarchy, he is co-editor (with Kathleen Claussen) of The Sustainability Revolution in International Trade Agreements (Oxford University Press, 2024). Chair: Dr Jamie Trinidad This lecture was delivered on 16 October 2026 as part of the Centre's Friday Lunchtime Lecture series.

On Friday 18 September 2026 Cambridge Women in Law held this panel event as part of the Cambridge Alumni Festival. AI is shaping all walks of life. This is particularly true in respect of the law. Litigants rely on ChatGPT to submit their complaints and lawyers have access to databases of precedents, search tools and the capacity for AI to manage vast numbers of documents, often better than humans. This raises the question whether there is still a need for lawyers and, for the Faculty of Law at Cambridge, what this means for the law degree. In this session leading Cambridge academics and practitioners debate the challenges and opportunities for legal education posed by the ever-increasing availability and capacity of AI tools. Speakers: Professor Louise Merrett Professor Louise Gullifer Professor Catherine Barnard Professor Felix Steffek Jonathan Chamberlain Anneliese Day KC

Speaker: Dr Luke Dimitrios Spieker, Humboldt University, Berlin Abstract: The CJEU’s decision in Commission v Malta marks the summit of a long-standing, highly controversial debate in European legal scholarship. Considering the Maltese practice of “golden passports” incompatible with EU law, the Court expanded the reach of EU law and established constraints for the conferral of the Member States’ nationalities. At its heart, the decision developed a shared concept of nationality based on a “special relationship of solidarity and good faith”. To justify this bold step, the Court mobilized EU values: “Union citizenship” – we are told – “is based on the common values contained in Article 2 TEU”. In this talk, we will explore how EU values may require a shared concept of nationality and justify the genuine link-requirement established by the Court. At its centre are the notions of democracy and trust, solidarity and belonging. Ultimately, it seems that the Court embraced a communitarian understanding of citizenship – one that builds on belonging. Biography: Dr Luke Dimitrios Spieker is a postdoctoral researcher at Humboldt University Berlin and a Senior Research Fellow at the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law. His research explores EU law’s constitutional foundations, including its common values and structural principles as well as Union citizenship and fundamental rights. He has been awarded several prizes, such as the Heinz Meier-Leibnitz-Prize of the German Research Foundation, the UACES Best Book Prize, or the Common Market Law Review Prize for Young Academics. For more information see: https://www.cels.law.cam.ac.uk/weekly-seminar-series

In this episode, Janice chats to Jack, Nicholas and Mira about the realities of being a fresher and making the most of your first year at university. Jack and Nicholas are third-year Law students, while Mira is a third-year History student, bringing together different perspectives and plenty of hard-earned wisdom. The conversation covers three key areas: Academic life: settling into lectures, seminars and independent study, finding what works for you, and managing the transition to university-level work. Social life: making friends, finding your people, navigating Freshers’ Week, and dealing with the pressure to have the “perfect” university experience. Extracurriculars and careers: getting involved in societies and events, making the most of opportunities, and starting to think about your career, whatever your degree. Tune in for practical advice and honest reflections on making the most of your first year. A special thanks to Jack, Mira, and Nicholas for sharing their thoughts and to Daniel Bates for his excellent pre- and post-podcast bants.

This is the second interview with Professor Philippe Sands. Professor Sands was interviewed for the second time on 25th June 2026 At his home in Hampstead. For more information, see the Squire Law Library website at: http://www.squire.law.cam.ac.uk/eminent-scholars-archive