English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This article uses prize law to examine the end of war in the twentieth century. The Armistice agreement that concluded the First World War enshrined the victor’s right to seize enemy merchant ships after the cessation of military hostilities, shifting the legal understanding of a hostile act. This disconnection turned prize into a strategic tool for victors to use over belligerents. This appeared again in the Second World War, when prize courts condoned the taking of prize after Germany’s surrender. Egypt used prize law as a strategic tool to continue its prohibition against Israel’s use of the Suez Canal. The article concludes prize-taking in the twentieth century was not just a historical curiosity, but a strategic imperative for victors.

When does war end? Armistice and the Prize Courts of the twentieth century