IDS Flashcards
(22 cards)
What is an international dispute? Case?
disagreement on a point of law or fact between two parties
Mavrommatis Palestine case
Which case concerns peaceful settlement of international disputes? What does it say?
Art 2(3) UN charter
all member shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means so that international:
peace
security
justice
are not endangered
What are the methods of international dispute settlement? Law? (6)
1970s friendly relations declaration / art 33 UN charter
States shall seek early and just settlement of international disputes by
negotiation inquiry mediation conciliation arbitration judicial settlement
or other peaceful means of their choice.
What are the 4 diplomatic means of international dispute settlement??
negotiation
mediation
inquiry
conciliation
What is mediation?
this is like negotiation but involves a third party
Who is involved in a mediation?
“good office” - encourages the parties to resume negotiations / acts as a channel of communication
mediator - active participant - advances fresh ideas, interprets, and transmits party proposals to each party
What are some of the duties of a mediator?
reminds parties of their real objectives
encourages rethinking
devises compromises
What is inquiry used for?
the ascertainment of facts
What is conciliation?
commission is set up by disputing parties to deal with dispute
impartial examination, and attempts to define the terms of settlement take place
What is arbitration?
parties themselves set up a tribunal to decide a dispute
usually on the basis of international law
parties can choose arbitrators
parties define the question to be answered - they can exercise some control over the procedure
the decision is binding
What are the three requirements for jurisdiction of the ICJ?
- Must be a complaint by a state
- must be consent
- there must be admissibility before the court
Which piece of legislation concerns states going before the court? What does it state?
Art 34 statute of the ICJ
Only states may be parties in cases before the ICJ
What 2 kinds of consent are there?
- AFTER DISPUTE - Special agreement (compromis) - parties make an agreement that their disagreement will be referred to the ICJ - 36(1)
- DURING DISPUTE - forum prorogatum - consent identifiable from conduct of respondent state
- BEFORE DISPUTE - optional clause - jurisdiction is compulsory where state party has made a declaration according to art 36(2), and this declaration is reciprocated by the other party involved.
Which case concerns Special agreements (compromis)?
Maritime Delimination and Territorial Questions Case 1994
Qatar and Bahrain were in a disagreement - they tried to enter into an agreement so that the disagreement could be referred to the ICJ
They stated that if an agreement could not be made, the matter would be referred to in the ICJ
this declaration was signed by the state representatives, and this was understood to be an international agreement coseting to ICJ jurisdiction
Which case concerns forum prorogatum?
Djibouti v France
Can countries who have made a declaration under the optional system, make reservations?
yes
What is one of the key rules of the optional clause system? Example?
Where both parties to a dispute have made a declaration under s36(2), they must be reciprocal.
This means they must mirror each other
For example, where two states made declarations under s36(2), but only one made a reservation clause, jurisdiction does not arise
What is the key case concerning reservations and the optional clause system?
Norwegian Loans case, France v Norway
France brought legal proceedings under the optional clause
However, France made a reservation that optional clause would not apply to matters within France’s domestic jurisdiction
Norway had no such reservation
Because the optional clauses were not reciprocal, the court had no jurisdiction
When would jurisdiction not be admissible?
where there is no consent from third party whose involvement in the case concerns the “very subject matter of the case”
Give an example of the ICJ lacking admissibility due to the lack of consent of a third party - facts?
Monetary Gold case, Italy v UK
Gold taken from Italy, by Germany - ended up in hands of allied powers
Italy demanded gold back
Albania argued Italy took the gold from them
As Albania had not made a declaration under art 36(2), and their involvment formed the very subject matter, court had no jurisdiction
When will a court have admissibility despite third party involvement? Case?
where the third party involved is “merely affected”
Phosphate Lands in Nauru
Where may third parties intervene with ICJ cases? Laws?
Art 62 - where state feels they have an interest in the legal nature of the decision
Art 63 - all parties to a convention may intervene, were it is being interpreted by the ICJ
