You are on page 1of 4

Cases

North Sea Continental Shelf Cases (1969) ICJ - Denmark vs Germany equity, customary law,
Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons Advisory Opinion
(1996) ICJ - court held back from saying that nuclear weapons are
forbidden, you never know what the advisory opinion will be
Fisheries Case (United Kingdom v Norway) – see the summary on the ICJ
website: http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/5/1811.pdf - norway won
because it could prove that its decree of 1935 was in accordance with
its long term practice and was considered law (opinio juris)
Law of the Sea Convention - 1982 - EEZ
Security Council Resolution 1973 (2011) The situation in Libya. - arms
embargo and no-fly zone
Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against
Nicaragua (Merits)
(1986) ICJ Reports 14, at paras 188, 190, 193-95, 199-200, 211, and
227-238.
Montevideo Conv, art 1, and notes 1-4: Harris Casebook, supra, at 9194 - defined territory, permanent population, willingness to enter
international relations, government
Case of Certain Norwegian Loans (France v Norway) – see the
summary on the ICJ website: http://www.icjcij.org/docket/files/29/4775.pdf - optional clause, reciprocity (equal
footing), no jurisdiction since it was a "national question"
Hesperides Hotels LTD vs Aegean Turkish Holidays - constructive recognition,
unrecognised states with full control and state functions - day-to-day activities warrant
recognition so that actual decisions may be taken
The Republic of Nicaragua v. The United States of America
Justice (ICJ) - use of force-

[1]

was a 1984 case of the International Court of

unlawful use of force

East Timor (Portugal v Australia), 1995 ICJ Reports 90 - icj decides it has no
jurisdiction over a non-self governing territory as international law deals with states
and can thus not decide.

2007 .use of force.secession. In view of the importance of the rights involved.human rights . Spain). secession is never an option Obligations erga omnes: “[A]n essential distinction should be drawn between the obligations of a State towards the international community as a whole.C. universal jurisdiction . By their very nature the former are the concern of all States.Treaty may be invalidated by customary rule ("ius cogens") o It has two elements: state practice and law-making intent ("opinio iuris"): 1969 North Sea Continental Shelf case. 2004 ICJ Reports 136 .un security council sanctions Kongo vs Uganda .2006 . Advisory Opinion.Treaty may co-exist with customary rule (Nicaragua case) . all States can be held to have a legal interest in their protection: they are obligations erga omnes.internal self-determination does not mean the right to secede external self-determination not so relevant now that most every colony is its own state. ECHR .” Confirms what is already found in national law and multilateral treaties. para. I. 33) Treaty may change/replace customary rule (Malta-Libya Continental Shelf case) .genocide. there is no general legal right of secession at will.genocide is a universal crime. rhodesia . (1970). 1986 Nicaragua case o 2010 Pulp Mills Case: Court refers to “a practice.Treaty may codify customary rule (Gabcikovo case) . unless severe crimes against society and a failure to adhere to the people's rights. but it is just an advisory opinion and cannot turn into a case without Israel's consent Sudan .J. which in recent years has gained so much acceptance among States that it may now be considered a requirement under general international law to undertake an environmental impact assessment where there is a risk that the proposed industrial activity may have a significant adverse impact in a transboundary context.what Israel is doing is not right.. Supreme Court Canada .” (Barcelona Traction Case (Belgium v.. and those arising vis-à-vis another State in the field of diplomatic protection.Treaty may be modified by customary rule (Gabcikovo) .Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.. ICJ Jorgens against Germany.

Africa case at 294-299.g. crimes against humanity. no derogation is ever permited ultra vires .Pinochet . .crimes against humanity can never be considered functions of a state and thus. Golder case) o International contracts (Texaco v.2001 Rome Statute 1998 . owed to international community ILC State Responsibility . aggression international criminal court optional clause jus cogens .genocide.W. 1960 and 1963 UNGA Resolutions on Outer Space → 1967 Outer Space Treaty) Self-determination → 1975 Western Sahara case o Borrowing from national law o o Fair hearing (e.acting outside of legal authority France vs Norway May lead to emergence of new state practice or negotiation of new treaty (e. both indicted while still serving obligations erga omnes . Libya) .owed to everybody. a sovereign leader isnt immune to persecution for crimes he has ordered during his rule Bashir from Sudan and Miloshevic.g. war crimes. Sahara case) But contrast 2002 Arrest Warrant Case → immunity of foreign ministers invented by ICJ – 1974 Icelandic Fisheries Case → preferential fishing zone invented by ICJ. 1986 Frontier Dispute Case) o Estoppel (1962 Cambodian Temple case) o Good faith (1974 Nuclear Tests cases) Principles endorsed by states o Non-discrimination (1966 S. per Judge Tanaka) o Sustainable development and the precautionary principle (1997 Gabcikovo case) o Self-determination (1975 W.sovereignty of permanent resources o Equity (1969 North Sea Continental Shelf case.natural law.

Requirements for Crimes Against Humanity: Knowledge. what physical acts will attract punishment as crimes .does it actually become the crime . or whether you only need knowledge . 64). Examples Use of force: Nicaragua case Torture: Al-Adsani case Genocide: Bosnian Genocide case Effects  Non-derogation: not even in time of national emergency: ECHR/ICCPR  Treaty invalidity (VC Arts.mental component that goes along with it .based on right and good. at the time of its conclusion. 53.for genocide you must have explicit intention. but reservations may still be allowed (Congo v Rwanda case)  Non-recognition of inconsistent national law (Namibia case)  Erga omnes status: any state can complain (Bosnian Genocide Case) But: consent still required for ICJ jurisdiction (Congo v Rwanda case) and state immunities still apply (Al-Adsani Requirements for Genocide: -long term intention -Identification of the Victims . systematic Niger vs Burkina Faso ex aequo et bono . widepsread.killing members. causing serious bodily harm. For the purposes of the present Convention. the ICJ can decide solely on what it considers fair and equitable (38. it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law. preventing birth or transfer of children -Mens Rea . racial.Ius Cogens (peremptory norms of international law) Article 53 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties: "A treaty is void if. a peremptory norm of general international law is a norm accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted and which can be modified only by a subsequent norm of general international law having the same character". ethnical or religious group -Actis Reus .a national. if the states agree.whether an act is done intentionally as opposed to accidentally.what kind of conduct is being punished.2) 1958 New York Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Rights .