- •Casebook of The Jessup Competition
- •Krasnodar, Russia
- •Table of Cases
- •International Court of Justice (icj) 4
- •International Court of Justice (icj) East Timor Case (Portugal V. Australia): Judgment of icj, 1995
- •The Ambatielos Claim (Greece V. United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland) (1956)
- •Nuclear Tests case (Australia V. France): Judgment of icj, 1974
- •North Sea Continental Shelf cases (Federal Republic of Germany V. Denmark; Federal Republic of Germany V. Netherland): Judgment of icj, 1969
- •Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited (Belgium V. Spain) (New Application: 1962) icj
- •The Corfu Channel Case (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland V. People's Republic of Albania), icj
- •Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua Case (Nicaragua V. United States of America), International Court of Justice (icj), 1986
- •Construction of a Wall Case (Advisory Opinion), icj, 9 July 2004
- •Oil Platforms Case (Islamic Republic of Iran V. United States of America), icj
- •La Grand Case (Germany V. Usa ), icj, 2 March 1999 Germany brings a case against the United States of America and requests the indication of provisional measures
- •Avena case and Other Mexican Nationals (Mexico V. United States of America), International Court of Justice (icj), 31 March 2004
- •Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary / Slovakia), icj, 17/02/1997 - 7 December 1998
- •Arrest Warrant Case of 11 April 2000 (Democratic Republic of the Congo V. Belgium). International Court of Justice (icj), 14 February 2002.
- •Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo V. Uganda), I.C.J., 2005
- •Asylum (Columbia V. Peru), Merits, 1950 I.C.J., 20 November 1950
- •Certain Phosphate Lands in Nauru (Nauru V. Australia), I.C.J., 1992
- •Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Gulf of Maine Area (Canada V. U.S.), I.C.J., 1984
- •Elettronica Sicula s.P.A. (elsi) (u.S. V. Italy), 1989 I.C.J.
- •Fisheries Case (u.K. V. Norway), 1951 I.C.J.
- •Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso V. Republic of Mali), 1986 I.C.J.
- •Interhandel (Switzerland V. U.S), Preliminary Objections, 1959 I.C.J.
- •Kasikili/Sedudu Island (Botswana V. Namibia), 1999 I.C.J.
- •Minquiers and Ecrehos (France V. U.K.), 1953 I.C.J.
- •Nottebohm (Liechtenstein V. Guatemala), Preliminary Objections, 1953 I.C.J.
- •Implications for international law
- •Rights of Nationals of the United States of America in Morocco (France V. United States of America), 1952 I.C.J.
- •Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge (Malaysia V. Singapore) 2008 I.C.J.
- •Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia V. Thailand), Preliminary Objections, 1961 I.C.J.
- •Western Sahara, Advisory Opinion, 1975 I.C.J.
- •Ss Wimbledon, p.C.I.J., Series a. No. 1, 1923
- •The Facts
- •The Applicants
- •The respondents
- •Jurisprudence
- •Russian Claim for Interest on Indemnities (Russia V. Turkey), Permanent Court of Arbitration (picj), 1912
- •Island of Palmas case (Netherlands, usa), Permanent Court of Arbitration (picj), April 1928
- •Payment of Various Serbian Loans Issued in France Case (France V. Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes), Permanent Court of International Justice (picj), 1929
- •The “Societe Commerciale De Belgique” (Belgium V. Greece), Permanent Court of International Justice, 1939
- •The Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions, Greece V. Britain, Permanent Court Of International Justice (picj), 1924.08.30
- •Reports of International Arbitral Awards (r.I.A.A.) Territorial Sovereignty and Scope of the Dispute (Eritrea V. Yemen), Reports of International Arbitral Awards (r.I.A.A.), 1998
- •Mexican Union Railway Company Claim (United Kingdom V. Mexico), February 1930, 5 r.I.A.A.
- •Chattin case, b. E. Chattin (United States.) V. United Mexican States
- •Other International Cases Trail Smelter (Canada V. United States): Arbitral Tribunal, 1941
- •Tinoco Claims Arbitration (Great Britain V. Costa Rica), Tinoco Claims Arbitration (1923)
- •Rainbow Warrior Case (New Zealand V. France)
- •Background
- •The Case
- •Consequences
- •National Cases Government of Democratic Republic of the Congo V. Venne: Supreme Court of Canada, 1971
- •Inter-Science Research and Development Services Ltd V. People's Republic of Mozambique: Full Transvaal Court, 1980
Western Sahara, Advisory Opinion, 1975 I.C.J.
Previously, Western Sahara belonged to Spain.
Spain announced on August 20, 1974, that a referendum on self-determination.
Morocco declared it cannot accept a referendum which would include an option for independence.
The Algerian official position was that it supported the right of self-determination of the people of the former Spanish colony.
The arguments presented by Morocco and Mauritania were essentially similar: that either one had a sovereign right over the territory.
For the latter question, the Court decided by a vote of 14 to two that it would decide. It was of the opinion, by 14 votes to two, that there were legal ties of allegiance between this territory and the Kingdom of Morocco.
Furthermore, it was of opinion, by 15 votes to one, that there were legal ties between this territory and the "Mauritanian entity".
However, the Court defined the nature of these legal ties in the penultimate paragraph of its opinion, and declared that neither legal tie implied sovereignty or rightful ownership over the territory. These legal ties also did not apply to "self-determination through the free and genuine expression of the will of the peoples of the Territory."
Additionally, judge Jane McAdam wrote, ‘it is for the people to determine the destiny of the territory and not the territory the destiny of the people.’
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Court_of_Justice_Advisory_Opinion_on_Western_Sahara
http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?sum=323&code=sa&p1=3&p2=4&case=61&k=69&p3=5
Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ) & Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA)
Legal Status of Eastern Greenland Case (Norway v. Dania): Judgment, Orders and Advisory Opinions of Permanent Court of International Justice, 1933
Norway was against the fact that Denmark, settled just west of Greenland, claims the whole island. But Norway had the infrastructure on the east coast.
Intertemporal Law
This is the principle on which the Court must take into account and apply the realities of the time, when there was the problem. As it was in the Island of Palmas, Clipperton Island arbitrations.
Critical Date
This is the point in time at which the action of the parties shall not be taken into account by the court (if they are aimed at strengthening the position of the problem.)
The case does not apply, but only mentioned as important.
Thus, the Court has much to say about the acquisition of title by discovery and how it is used now (in 1933).
http://www.lawteacher.net/english-legal-system/essays/legal-status-of-eastern-greenland.php
http://www.worldcourts.com/pcij/eng/decisions/1933.04.05_greenland.htm
Ss Wimbledon, p.C.I.J., Series a. No. 1, 1923
The case of the S.S. Wimbledon is all about sovereignty.
The Facts
In 1923, the situation in international law (particularly as regards international treaty making) was struggling to come to terms with the concept of state sovereignty. How could a state be completely sovereign, yet remain bound to some higher “authority” in the form of a treaty signed with another sovereign state?
The situation in this case regards the Treaty of Versailles (1919) and German sovereignty. The British ship, the S.S. Wimbledon (owned by a French company) attempted to carry munitions and supplies to Poland as they fought a war with Russia. Germany refused the boat access through the Kiel Canal. The canal is in German territory. Germany was a neutral party in the war and it did not wish to support either side. The application was made to the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ) to gain damages for lost time and money in the transport of the goods.