Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T00:55:26.467Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Appeal Relating to the Jurisdiction of the ICAO Council (India v. Pakistan). ICJ Reports 1972, p. 46

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2017

Alona E. Evans
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Judicial Decisions
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 67 , Issue 1 , January 1973 , pp. 127 - 145
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1973

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Caption by the Court.

2 Excerpted and digested by Wm. W. Bishop, Jr. The full majority opinion is given, aside from preliminary material. The English text is authoritative.

3 Composed for this case of Vice-Pres. Ammoun as Acting President; President Sir Muhammad Zafrulla Khan; Judges Fitzmaurice, Padilla Nervo, Forster, Gros, Bengzon, Petren, Lachs, Onyeama, Dillard, Ignacio-Pinto, de Castro, Morozov, Jimenéz de Aréchaga; and Judge ad hoc Nagendra Singh (named by India).

4 The opening and paragraphs A, B, and C are identical with those in the Application, just quoted.

5 These are quoted by the Court in paragraph 17, infra.

6 Quoted by the Court in paragraph 19, infra.

7 Judges Petren and Onyeama in their Separate Opinions also expressed the view that the Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.

8 Judge Dillard commenced his Separate Opinion by stating: “I am in fundamental agreement with the conclusions reached by the Court and the reasons supporting them. In this separate opinion I wish, first, merely to make certain general observations in further support of the Court’s Judgment and second, to indicate that the decision confirming the jurisdiction of the ICAO Council can also call on general principles of law recognized in many jurisdictions.”