Afps And Plo V. Alstom and Veolia (Versailles CT. APP.)

2013 ◽  
Vol 52 (5) ◽  
pp. 1157-1184
Author(s):  
Noah Rubins ◽  
Gisèle Tephens-Chu
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
Large Measure ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
International Court ◽  
International Rights ◽  
The Icj ◽  
General Competence ◽  
International Legal Personality

International legal personality has often been viewed as synonymous with statehood. States are the primary subjects of international law, and only they have general competence on the international plane, including the competence to create the law. However, in the 1949 Reparation for Injuries advisory opinion, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) acknowledged that forms of international legal personality other than statehood could exist. In determining whether the United Nations (UN) was an international person, the ICJ considered the functions and rights which had been conferred on the organization pursuant to the UN Charter. Although these were found to be distinct from the rights and duties possessed by States, the ICJ concluded that these necessarily involved “a large measure of international personality and the capacity to operate on an international plane.” According to the Court, the hallmarks of international legal personality included the ability to possess international rights and duties and the capacity to maintain such rights by bringing international claims.

The International Legal Personality of the EEC and its Treaty-Making Power

1985 ◽  
Vol 20 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 341-361
Author(s):  
Chava Shachor-Landau
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
International Rights ◽  
International Legal Personality

The second half of the twentieth century is witnessing a tremendous development of the concept of international organizations as “subjects” of international law. These “subjects” are endowed with international legal personality and with powers—express or implied—to achieve their declared objectives.The corner-stone to this new edifice was erected as long ago as 1949 by the International Court of Justice in its Advisory Opinion on Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United Nations. The Court examined the purposes and principles set out in the Charter of the U.N. and concluded that the Organization is an international person.… [I]t is a subject of international law and capable of possessing international rights and duties, and… it has capacity to maintain its rights by bringing international claims.… . Under international law, the Organization must be deemed to have those powers which, though not expressly provided in the Charter, are conferred upon it by necessary implication as being essential to the performance of its duties.

The International Court of Justice and International Organisations

2007 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-186 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine Brölmann
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
International Organisations ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Icj ◽  
International Legal Personality ◽  
Intergovernmental Organisations

AbstractThis vignette deals with the position of international intergovernmental organisations as non-state actors. In the case law of the ICJ the independent identity of international organisations is addressed in the formal terms of international legal personality. Such personality is undisputed in international practice: for example, international organisations not only have the capacity to conclude treaties but also, although the legal framework is not entirely settled yet, to bear international responsibility for violations of international law. The ICJ arguably has had a central role in the conceptualisation of organisations as independent actors in international law: with the 1949 Reparation Opinion intergovernmental organisations essentially received at one stroke the paraphernalia required by an international legal actor. The framework proposed by the Court was widely adopted to match developing practice and, although organisations figure in the majority of cases subsequently brought before the ICJ, it was considered and to some extent refined only in the 1996 Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict Opinion.

A Note on the ICJ Advisory Opinion on Kosovo

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 867-880 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Muharremi
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Declaration Of Independence ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Unilateral Declaration ◽  
The Icj

On 22 July 2010, the International Court of Justice (hereinafter the “ICJ”) delivered its advisory opinion on the accordance with international law of the unilateral declaration of independence in respect of Kosovo. The ICJ concluded that the declaration of independence dated 17 February 2008 did not violate any applicable rule of international law consisting of general international law, UNSC resolution 1244 (1999) (hereinafter the “Resolution 1244”) and the Constitutional Framework for Provisional Self-Government in Kosovo (hereinafter the “Constitutional Framework”). The ICJ delivered the advisory opinion in response to a question set out in resolution 63/3 dated 8 October 2008 of the General Assembly of the United Nations Organization (hereinafter the “General Assembly”), which asked if “the unilateral declaration of independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo is in accordance with international law.”

House Approves Proposal Permitting ICJ to Advise Domestic Courts

1983 ◽  
Vol 77 (2) ◽  
pp. 338-340
Author(s):  
Jack M. Goldklang
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
National Court ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
The Icj ◽  
Advisory Opinions

On December 17, 1982, the House of Representatives adopted a resolution supporting an expansion of the advisory opinion jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice. The resolution (H.R. Con. Res. 86) urges the President to explore the appropriateness of establishing a United Nations committee to seek advisory opinions from the ICJ. The committee would act when asked by a national court seeking advice regarding any international law question under the national court’s jurisdiction.

I. INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE, ACCORDANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL LAW OF THE UNILATERAL DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE IN RESPECT OF KOSOVO, ADVISORY OPINION OF 22 JULY 2010

2011 ◽  
Vol 60 (3) ◽  
pp. 799-810 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dov Jacobs
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Declaration Of Independence ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Unilateral Declaration ◽  
The Icj

‘Is the unilateral declaration of independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo in accordance with international law?’ It is to answer this question that the General Assembly of the United Nations (‘UNGA’) requested an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice (‘ICJ’). The request, adopted in October 20081 and initially sponsored by Serbia, was triggered by the declaration of independence of Kosovo issued on the 17 February 2008.2 Some two years later, on the 22 July 2010, the ICJ delivered its Advisory Opinion.3 By a 10–4 vote, the ICJ found that the declaration of independence of Kosovo did not violate international law.

Toward Authoritativeness: The ICJ Ruling on Israel’s Security Wall

2005 ◽  
Vol 99 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard A. Folk
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Obligations ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Icj ◽  
General Assembly Resolution ◽  
Palestinian Territory ◽  
Legal Consequences

On July 9, 2004, the International Court of Justice issued its advisory opinion on the legal consequences of Israel’s construction of a security wall on occupied Palestinian territory, declaring that the wall was in violation of international law. The advisory opinion also indicated that Israel should forthwith cease construction of the wall, dismantle what had been so far constructed, and make reparations to the Palestinians for all damages caused by the project. On July 20, 2004, at the Tenth Emergency Session of the General Assembly, Resolution ES-10/15 was adopted by a vote of 150 in favor, 6 opposed, and 10 abstentions, demanding that Israel comply with the legal obligations as specified by the advisory opinion.

scholarly journals INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS: ISSUES OF FUNDING OF THEIR ACTIVITY

2016 ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Анатолий Капустин ◽  
Anatoliy Kapustin
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
International Organization ◽  
Budget Process ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
International Rights ◽  
International Legal Personality

A few very important features of financial law of international organizations were consider in present article. The author puts forward an idea that funding of international organizations activities is an important element of the international legal personality of international organizations, because it allows them to ensure the necessary independence while executing their international rights and obligations and the exercise of their assigned functions. The main categories of financial law of international organizations were examined in article: the concept and types of incomes and expenses, the concept of budget process of the international organization in accordance with two ways of funding of international organizations settled in the XX century. Special attention was paid to the analysis of the obligations of Member States of an international organization to contribute to the organization’s budget. For these purposes, the analysis of the positions of judges of the International Court of Justice and the opinions of scientists on this issue in the context of the proceedings on certain expenses of the United Nations. The author has come to conclusion about necessity of the further study of the problems of the financial law of international organizations.

An Analysis of the ICJ Advisory Opinion on Kosovo's Unilateral Declaration of Independence

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 895-912 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Cirkovic
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Complete Removal ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Declaration Of Independence ◽  
International Court ◽  
Unilateral Declaration ◽  
Protection Mechanisms ◽  
The Icj

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled in an advisory opinion on 22 July 2010 that Kosovo's 17 February 2008 unilateral declaration of independence from Serbia did not violate international law. The Kosovo Parliament's declaration of independence stated that Kosovo would continue to be bound by the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999) (hereinafter “SC Resolution 1244 (1999)”), as well as the Ahtisaari plan. UN Special Envoy for Kosovo Martti Ahtisaari's proposal, produced in February 2007, defined Kosovo's internal settlement, minority-protection mechanisms, and allowed for independence under international supervision. The proposal increased the powers devolved to Kosovar institutions but without providing for the complete removal of international oversight and authority.

The Kosovo Advisory Opinion: Conflict Resolution and Precedent

2011 ◽  
Vol 105 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Falk
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
Political Movements ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Sovereign State ◽  
Declaration Of Independence ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Icj

The somewhat surprising majority view in the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) assessing Kosovo's declaration of independence has some bearingon prospects for an eventual end to the bitter conflict between Kosovo and Serbia. It may also have some relevance for a variety of political movements around the world whose leaders might be more inclined than previously to tempt fate by declaring their people and territory to be internationally independent of the sovereign state within which they are now geographically located. Significantly,the ICJ majority sidestepped the question put to it by the General Assembly, in a move objectionable to the four dissenting judges,recasting it in such a way as to limit its response to whether Kosovo's declaration of independence, issued on February 17,2008, was “in accordance with international law” to the rather bland assertion that the declaration did not violate international law. The Court did not say, and explicitly ruled out any interpretation suggesting, that Kosovo's declaration was acceptable under international law, although by Lotus reasoning, what a state is not expressly prohibited from doing is permitted.3 The majority also expressed its view that the declaration was not to be viewed as decidingupon Kosovo's final status in world diplomacy.

Kosovo after the ICJ Advisory Opinion: Towards a European Perspective?

2012 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 219-241 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Ingravallo
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
European Perspective ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Western Balkans ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Icj

Abstract The article deals with the advisory opinion given on 22 July 2010 by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the accordance with international law of the declaration of independence from Serbia adopted by Kosovo authorities on 17 February 2008. The advisory opinion is critically examined in the light of international law and of United Nations Security Council resolution 1244 (1999). The responsibilities of the European Union in Kosovo are also scrutinized, with regard to the mandate of EULEX Kosovo, the role of the EU as a facilitator of the dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina, and the European perspective for Kosovo and the Western Balkans.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document