The Danube: Damned or Dammed? The Dispute Between Hungary and Slovakia Concerning the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project.

1995 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 287-309 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik Hoenderkamp
Keyword(s):  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Joint Project ◽  
Power Stations ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Contributory Negligence ◽  
Treaty Law

AbstractThis article deals with the legal aspects of the dispute between Hungary and Slovakia concerning a joint project of locks and power-stations, which had to be constructed in the Danube at Gabc ikovo and Nagymaros. Rules of treaty-law, environ-mental protection, good faith, reprisal and contributory negligence will be applied to assess whether Hungary was entitled to terminate the treaty and whether Slovakia could lawfully construct a provisional solution. Furthermore the significance of the case and its submission to the International Court of Justice is addressed.

Territorial Dimensions of Self-Determination

2018 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 427-468
Keyword(s):  
Middle East ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
The Third ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Middle East Conflict ◽  
International Court ◽  
Generous Support

Professor Yaël Ronen introduced the workshop as the fourth in a series of events on legal aspects of the Middle East conflict. The first two events concerned the Palestine Mandate of 1922. The third focused on the 1948 refugee issue. All these events have and are being held with the generous support of the Knapp Family Foundation and under the auspices of the International Law Forum of the Faculty of Law. Also, as part of the Shabtai Rosenne International Law Center Initiative, the first session was dedicated to the commemoration of the work of the late Shabtai Rosenne, whose scholarship spanned a host of international law issues but who is most renowned for his work on the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

Case Analysis: The Nicaragua Case and the Denunciation of Declarations of Acceptance of the Compulsory Jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice

1998 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan José Quintana
Keyword(s):  
Case Analysis ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Reasonable Time ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Impact

This paper is concerned with the denunciation of declarations of acceptance of the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice under the Optional Clause and the impact that the 1984 Judgment of the Court in the jurisdictional phase of the Nicaragua case may have had upon it. In this decision the Court found that the principle of good faith is of paramount importance in the legal regime of the Optional Clause and introduced in that regime the element of a ‘reasonable time’ for the denunciation of declarations of indefinite duration and silent as to termination. The relevant passage of the Judgment is discussed with a view to determine the contours of this requirement and the ways it may operate in practice.

Bolivia-Chile border issue will benefit Morales

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Good Faith ◽  
Water Usage ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Content Type ◽  
International Jurisdiction ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Pacific ◽  
The Icj ◽  
The Subject

Significance Oral hearings regarding the dispute begin at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on March 19 and will last for nine days. The case is unusual in that the plaintiff (landlocked Bolivia) wishes to oblige the defendant (Chile) to negotiate a territorial settlement ‘in good faith’ to restore its access to the sea. Chile, which has long sought to prevent the issue becoming the subject of international jurisdiction, asserts the matter is purely bilateral. Impacts Peru is likely to play a role in any eventual scheme to give Bolivia access to the Pacific. International opinion will remain sympathetic to Bolivia’s claim but, ultimately, unable to force a solution. With Chile also taking Bolivia to the ICJ over water usage, any territorial resolution may depend on that issue’s progress.

Obligation to Negotiate Access to the Pacific Ocean (Bolivia v. Chile): Preliminary Objection (I.C.J.)

2016 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 74-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julian G. Ku
Keyword(s):  
Pacific Ocean ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Peace Treaty ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Pacific ◽  
The Icj ◽  
The Pacific Ocean

On September 24, 2015, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) released its judgment on the preliminary objection filed by Chile in Obligation to Negotiate Access to the Pacific Ocean.1 Chile had objected to the ICJ’s jurisdiction arguing that Bolivia’s application raises a dispute that had already been settled by the 1904 Peace Treaty Between Bolivia and Chile. The ICJ, however, rejected this jurisdictional objection and agreed to consider the merits of Bolivia’s claim that Chile has an obligation to negotiate in good faith the issue of Bolivia’s sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean.

scholarly journals International Legal Aspects of the Reunification of Crimea with Russia in the Context of the Practice of the International Court of Justice

2019 ◽  
pp. 29-36
Author(s):  
Alexander MEZYAEV
Keyword(s):  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Declaration Of Independence ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Icj

The article addresses, from a sources of law perspective, the problem of legal qualification of Crimean reunification with Russia. Special attention is given to analyzing the International Court of Justice decision on the unilateral secession of Kosovo, including written statements by particular States during the ICJ hearings on this issue. The author argues why referring to the advisory opinion of the ICJ on Kosovo's declaration of independence is not appropriate in the Crimean case, and why the legitimacy of Crimea's reunification with Russia is much higher than the estimated, from the ICJ's point of view, legitimacy of Kosovo's secession.

The 2015 Judicial Activity of the International Court of Justice

2016 ◽  
Vol 110 (3) ◽  
pp. 504-525 ◽  
Author(s):  
Surabhi Ranganathan
Keyword(s):  
Good Faith ◽  
The Other ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
The Third ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Points Of Interest ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Pacific ◽  
The Pacific Ocean ◽  
The Individual

The International Court of Justice (Court or ICJ) delivered three judgments in 2015. The first, delivered on February 3, 2015, determines claims of genocide made by Croatia and Serbia against each other. The second, delivered on September 24, 2015, addresses Chile’s preliminary objection in a case brought against it by Bolivia, which asserted that Chile had violated its obligation to negotiate in good faith to secure Bolivia’s sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean. The third, delivered on December 16, 2015, concerns the joined cases brought by Costa Rica and Nicaragua, each party alleging territorial violations and transboundary environmental harms by the other. This review highlights notable points of interest in the judgments and draws attention to particular insights and critiques afforded by the individual opinions that accompany each judgment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document