Revocation and Modification of Provisional Measures Orders in the International Court of Justice: The Court’s Order Regarding Certain Activities Carried out by Nicaragua in the Border Area and the Case Concerning Construction of a Road in Costa Rica along the San Juan River Joint Proceedings

2013 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 463-474 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrés Sarmiento Lamus
Keyword(s):  
Costa Rica ◽  
San Juan ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Border Area ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
San Juan River

Abstract This article seeks to analyse the revocation and modification of provisional measures, as indicated by the International Court of Justice, in light of the Court’s recent order in the joint proceedings of Certain Activities carried out by Nicaragua in the Border Area and the case concerning Construction of a Road in Costa Rica along the San Juan River. The request presented before the Court, by both parties, constitutes the first instance in which a request of this type has ever been submitted. Consequently, the order rendered by the Court, with regard to the procedural and substantive aspects concerning the indication of provisional measures, contains some points that are open to further analysis.

Certain Activities Carried out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua)/Construction of a Road in Costa Rica along The San Juan River (Nicaragua v. Costa Rica) (I.C.J.)

2016 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 417-473 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cameron A. Miles
Keyword(s):  
Costa Rica ◽  
San Juan ◽  
Pulp Mills ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Border Area ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessments ◽  
International Court ◽  
San Juan River ◽  
The Icj

December 16, 2015, saw the International Court of Justice (ICJ or the Court) render final judgment in the joined cases of Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua) (Border Area) and Construction of a Road in Costa Rica Along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v. Costa Rica) (Road). Together, these cases represented an opportunity for the Court to advance and clarify its thinking on the role of environmental impact assessments (EIA) in general international law, as first introduced in its decision in Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay) (Pulp Mills), with both Costa Rica (in Border Area) and Nicaragua (in Road) alleging that the other had failed to carry out an EIA with respect to certain, potentially environmentally harmful, activities. They also raised some interesting questions regarding remedies for the breach of provisional measures awarded under Article 41 of the ICJ Statute.

scholarly journals Geographic maps as evidence in practice of the international court of justice

2016 ◽  
Vol 68 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-111
Author(s):  
Marko Novakovic
Keyword(s):  
Costa Rica ◽  
Direct Evidence ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The State ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Border Area ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
San Juan River ◽  
The Will

The paper deals with the use of geographic maps as evidence in the practice of the International Court of Justice with a view to the latest cases in which the Court in its judgments elaborated maps as evidence: the case Certain Activities carried out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua) and Construction of a Road in Costa Rica along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v. Costa Rica). The analysis comprehends the evidentiary value of geographic maps throughout the International Court of Justice's jurisprudence and even in the case-law of its predecessors. The author emphasizes that the substantial element that affects whether a geographic map will be accepted as direct evidence before the International Court of Justice is the consent of the parties to the dispute, as well as the fact, that the map stands as an expression of the will of the state. The author concludes that the map properties-such as details, quality and consistency-have no impact on the acceptance of the map as direct evidence, but only on whether the geographic map is to be accepted as an indirect proof.

Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua in the Border Area

2020 ◽  
Vol 187 ◽  
pp. 1-543
Keyword(s):  
Costa Rica ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Environmental Damage ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Main Claim ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
San Juan River

International Court of Justice — Provisional measures — Requirements for the indication of provisional measures — Prima facie jurisdiction — Jurisdiction under American Treaty on Pacific Settlement, 1948 (Pact of Bogotá) — Plausibility of rights claimed — Whether rights claimed by Costa Rica plausible — Irreparable damage — Whether rights claimed by Costa Rica at imminent risk of irreparable prejudiceInternational Court of Justice — Procedure — Control of proceedings — Joinder of proceedings — Counter-claims — Admissibility of counter-claims — Whether counter-claims of Nicaragua having direct connection with main claim of Costa Rica — Conditions for establishing whether a counter-claim connected in fact and in law with main claimInternational Court of Justice — Evidence — Weight to be given — Expert evidence — Burden and standard of proof — CompensationTerritory — Sovereignty — Disputed territory — Costa Rica’s claim that Nicaragua carried out activities in territory under sovereignty of Costa Rica — Extent of disputed territory — Treaty of Limits, 1858 — Cleveland Award, 1888 — Alexander Awards, 1897 — Whether “first channel met” was the caño dredged by Nicaragua starting in 2010 — Whether disputed territory falling under sovereignty of NicaraguaEnvironment — Procedural obligations — Substantive obligations — Nicaragua’s alleged breaches of international environmental law — Whether Nicaragua having to provide Costa Rica with environmental impact assessment relating to activities in disputed territory — Whether Nicaragua breaching its obligations to notify and consult with Costa Rica — Whether Nicaragua breaching its obligation not to cause transboundary harm — Costa Rica’s alleged breaches of international environmental law — Whether Costa Rica breaching its obligation to provide Nicaragua with environmental impact assessment relating to construction of Road 1856 along San Juan River — Whether Costa Rica breaching its obligations to notify and consult with Nicaragua — Whether Costa Rica breaching its obligations under Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992 — Whether Costa Rica breaching its obligation not to cause 2transboundary harm — Whether Costa Rica breaching Nicaragua’s territorial integrityRivers — Right of navigation — Whether Nicaragua breaching Costa Rica’s right of navigation on San Juan River under Treaty of Limits, 1858 — PollutionState responsibility — Breach of provisional measures — Whether evidence showing that Nicaragua breached provisional measures — Assessing compliance with provisional measures at merits stage — Costs — Whether Costa Rica to be awarded costs as a result of Nicaragua’s breach of provisional measures — Breach of territorial integrity — Presence of Nicaragua’s military camp in disputed territory — Declaration that territorial integrity had been breached — Reparation — Compensation to be determined by Parties through negotiation within a year — Whether Court to be requested to determine amount of compensation by either Party after one year had elapsedDamages — Environmental damage — Consequences of responsibility for environmental damage — Request by Costa Rica to determine amount of compensation — Obligation to make full reparation — Hierarchy of means of reparation — Punitive or exemplary damages — Three-step approach to awarding compensation — Establishment of unlawful act — Causal link between unlawful act and injury suffered — Quantification — Compensation for environmental damage — Compensation for expenses incurred by Costa Rica — Methodology to quantify amount due — Parties disagreeing on appropriate methodology — Expenses by Costa Rica as a result of unlawful activities in disputed territory — Expenses by Costa Rica as a result of Nicaragua’s breach of provisional measures — Expenses by Costa Rica for construction and monitoring of a dyke — Costa Rica’s claim for pre-judgment and post-judgment interest — Whether pre-judgment interest necessary to ensure full reparation — Date by which compensation to be paid by Nicaragua

Legal Maxims: Summaries and Extracts from Selected Case Law

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuliana Ziccardi Capaldo
Keyword(s):  
Costa Rica ◽  
Case Law ◽  
San Juan ◽  
Border Area ◽  
San Juan River

Certain Activities Carried out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua) Proceedings joined with Construction of a Road in Costa Rica Along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v. Costa Rica), Judgment, 16 December 2015Contents**I. JURISDICTION OF THE COURTII....

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document