Rethinking the Meaning of Ordinary Meaning in Light of the ICJ’s Jurisprudence

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 267-288
Author(s):  
Katayoun Hosseinnejad
Keyword(s):  
Vienna Convention ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Ordinary Meaning ◽  
Objective Standard ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
The Law ◽  
Legal Meaning

Abstract Article 31 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties calls for consideration of the ordinary meaning as the starting point in the process of interpretation. Although the linguistic concept of ordinary meaning is founded on the idea that the meaning of a sentence is directly imposed by the norms of language so that interpreters are provided with an objective standard which is external to their subjectivity, this article demonstrates that the interpretive jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice has departed from the imperatives of the ordinary meaning doctrine. Rather, the Court, mindful of the problem that no mere sequence of words can represent actual legal meaning, has moved towards construction of ordinary meaning.

scholarly journals La aplicación de las reglas sobre interpretación de los tratados a la luz de la sentencia sobre excepciones preliminares en el caso entre Somalia v. Kenia

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (12) ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco Lertora Pinto
Keyword(s):  
Important Task ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Law

The judgment on preliminary objection was pronounced by the International Court of Justice on 2 February 2017. In this sentence, the Court rejected all the preliminary objections presented by Kenya. One of the most important task realized by the Court in every judgment is the work of interpretation of treaties. In the present case, the interpretation was relevant for the purpose of determinate both, why the Court has jurisdiction and why all the preliminary objections should be rejected. The interpretation according to the rules of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, in particular the Articles 31 and 32, are the purpose of the present study in relationship to its application in this case, particularly in the interpretation of the MOU.

scholarly journals TRAVAUX PREPARATOIRES: APPLICATION BY THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE IN INTERPRETATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

2019 ◽  
pp. 144-152
Author(s):  
S. Karvatska
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Icj ◽  
The Law ◽  
Text Context ◽  
Advisory Opinions

The article is devoted to the analysis of the nature, essence and mechanism of the application of travaux preparatoires by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the process of interpreting the international law. It is proved that the interpretational practice of the ICJ shows the extension of the doctrinal approaches of the traditional perception of travaux preparatoires as an auxiliary tool. It has been established that the ICJ uses travaux preparatoires 1 to identify the intent of the legislator; 2 to provide advisory opinions; 3 to clarify the intentions of the parties to the treaty; 4) to determine the jurisdiction of the ICJ; 5) to identify the true intentions of the parties to the dispute; 6) to decide questions regarding the text, context, purpose and object of the treaty as a general rule of interpretation, fixed in Art. 31 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969.

FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES AS THE GROUND FOR THE TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF THE OPERATION OF AN INTERNATIONAL TREATY

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mykyta Antonov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Fundamental Change ◽  
Highly Qualified ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Treaty ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Law

In this article the author examines a fundamental change of circumstances as the ground for the termination or suspension of the operation of an international treaty in accordance with Article 62 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and Customary International Law. The interpretation of the application of the fundamental change of circumstances is analyzed in accordance with the practice of the International Court of Justice and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists in international law of various nations.

scholarly journals The Search for Meaning: continuing Problems with the Interpretation of Treaties

2002 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 209 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter McRae
Keyword(s):  
Conclusive Evidence ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Search For Meaning ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Orthodox Interpretation ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Icj ◽  
Treaty Interpretation ◽  
The Law

This paper argues that old controversies regarding the objects and methods of treaty interpretation have not been resolved by the coming into force of articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969. The articles, it is argued, have not so much resolved previous debates between "schools" of interpretation, as obscured them under an apparently clear regime, while interpreters continue to adopt their own preferences. The paper describes the three main schools – textualist, intentions of the parties, and teleological – and concludes none offers a satisfactory scheme by itself. It then examines the development of the Convention articles, and concludes they represented a compromise in which the drafters failed to resolve the key issue of the underlying purpose or object of interpretation. It then shows that an orthodox interpretation of the articles has developed, which assumes they embody the textualist position. The paper then discusses how this orthodoxy has been accepted by the majority of the International Court of Justice in the 1990s, but with significant dissent drawing on insights from especially an intentions of the parties approach. The paper then draws on insights from modern approaches to the interpretation of commercial contracts, to suggest that the best resolution of the "text versus intentions" dichotomy lies in accepting that establishing the actual intentions of parties is the purpose of interpretation, and that therefore an apparently clear text will be strong but not conclusive evidence of such intentions. The paper examines how this refinement would have helped to resolve difficult interpretations before the ICJ, and concludes that such an approach is both desirable and consistent with articles 31 and 32.

Unilateral Denunciation of Treaties: The Vienna Convention and the International Court of Justice

1974 ◽  
Vol 68 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Herbert W. Briggs
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
Rules Set

The final preambular paragraph of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties affirms “that the rules of customary internationallaw will continue to govern questions not regulated by the provisions of the present Convention;” and Article 4 of the Convention, establishing the nonretroactivity of the Convention by providing that it “applies only totreaties which are concluded by States, after the entry into force of the present Convention with regard to such States,” stipulates that this nonretroactivity is “ [w]ithout prejudice to the application of any rules set forth in the present Convention to which treaties would be subject under international law independently of the Convention.”

scholarly journals Theoretical and Practical Significance of the Issue of Maritime Delimitation in the Law of the Sea

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bojana Lakićević-Đuranović
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Practical Significance ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Law

This paper aims to show the significance of maritime delimitation in the Law of the Sea, as well as the contribution of international jurisprudence to the creation of the rules of maritime delimitation. The decisions of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the awards of arbitration tribunals are especially significant in the part of the Law of the Sea dealing with maritime delimitation. Based on the analysis of the principle of equity and the method of equidistance, the jurisprudence of the courts is shown to have established precedents and to have an irreplaceable role in the development of the international Law of the Sea, particularly in the segment of maritime delimitations.

The 2004 Judicial Activity of the International Court of Justice

2005 ◽  
Vol 99 (2) ◽  
pp. 450-459 ◽  
Author(s):  
John R. Crook
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
State Court ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Crown Prince ◽  
Palestinian Territory

During 2004 the International Court of Justice decided three important matters. In March the Court found that the United States had violated the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations with respect to a number of Mexican nationals sentenced to death in U.S. state court proceedings. In a much-noted advisory opinion, the Court concluded in July that Israel's construction of a security wall or fence in occupied Palestinian territory violated international law. And in December it found that it did not have jurisdiction over Serbia and Montenegro's claims against eight NATO countries regarding NATO's 1999 bombing campaign aimed at halting the conflict in Kosovo. In other developments, the Court heard and had under deliberation Germany's preliminary objections to Liechtenstein's suit regarding certain property of Crown Prince Adam. Finally, Judge Gilbert Guillaume, a member of the Court since 1987 and its former president, announced that he would resign in February 2005.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document