- •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
Avena case and Other Mexican Nationals (Mexico V. United States of America), International Court of Justice (icj), 31 March 2004
On 9 January 2003 Mexico instituted proceedings against the United States of America in a dispute concerning alleged breaches of Articles 5 and 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 24 April 1963 in relation to the treatment of a number of Mexican nationals who had been tried, convicted and sentenced to death in criminal proceedings in the United States. On 9 January 2003 Mexico also asked the Court to indicate provisional measures, and in particular to order the United States to take all measures necessary to ensure that no Mexican national was executed pending a final decision of the Court.
On 5 February 2003 the Court unanimously adopted an Order indicating such measures. On 31 March 2004, in the judgment on the merits, the Court found that the United States of America had breached its obligations to Mr. Avena and other Mexican nationals and to Mexico under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.
On 5 June 2008 Mexico filed a Request for Interpretation of part of the Judgment of 31 March 2004.
In the Avena Case the US raised an argument similar to the one it raised in the La Grand Case without describing it as a ‘clean hands’ argument. The objection was presented in terms of the interpretation of Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 1963. The interpretation given by the US was based on the rule that a treaty may not be interpreted so as to impose a significantly greater burden on any one party than the other. The ICJ dismissed the argument. The court relied on an approach to the interpretation of the Vienna Convention which did not permit it to accept the argument of the US. It then said:
Even if it were shown, therefore, that Mexico's practice as regards the application of article 36 was not beyond reproach, this would not constitute a ground of objection to the admissibility of Mexico's claim.
http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?pr=605&code=mus&p1=3&p2=3&p3=6&
http://www.haguejusticeportal.net/index.php?id=6186
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico_v._United_States_of_America
Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary / Slovakia), icj, 17/02/1997 - 7 December 1998
The Gabčíkovo–Nagymaros Dams (more precisely Gabčíkovo–Nagymaros Waterworks) is a large barrage project on the Danube. It was initiated by the Budapest Treaty of 16 September 1977 between the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic and the People's Republic of Hungary. The project aimed at preventing catastrophic floods, improving river navigability and producing clean electricity. Only a part of the project has been finished in Slovakia, under the name Gabčíkovo Dam, because Hungary first suspended then tried to terminate the project due to environmental concerns. Slovakia proceeded with an alternative solution, called "Variant C", which involved diverting the Danube. These caused a still unresolved international dispute between Slovakia and Hungary. Both parties turned to the International Court at The Hague for a ruling.
The Court found that both Hungary and Slovakia had breached their legal obligations. It called on both States to negotiate in good faith in order to ensure the achievement of the objectives of the 1977 Budapest Treaty, which it declared was still in force, while taking account of the factual situation that had developed since 1989.[10]
Each Party must compensate the other Party for the damage caused by its conduct.
http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/92/7377.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gab%C4%8D%C3%ADkovo%E2%80%93Nagymaros_Dams