Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T18:25:11.054Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Canada: Acceptance of I.C.J. Compulsory Jurisdiction with regard to Disputes Arising out of Jurisdictional Claims*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 May 2017

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Other Documents
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1985

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.)

Footnotes

*

[Reproduced from the text provided by the Canadian Embassy, Washington, D.C. [Canada's declaration of April 7, 1970, appears at 9 I.L.M. 598 (1970). The above notice is identical with that declaration except that paragraph (2)(d) has been deleted. That paragraph reads:

“disputes arising out of or concerning jurisdiction or rights claimed or exercised by Canada in respect of the conservation, management or exploitation of the living resources of the sea, or in respect of the prevention or control of pollution or contamination of the marine environment in marine areas adjacent to the coast of Canada.” This reservation, consequently, applies no longer.]

References

* [Reproduced from the text provided by the Canadian Embassy, Washington, D.C. [Canada's declaration of April 7, 1970, appears at 9 I.L.M. 598 (1970). The above notice is identical with that declaration except that paragraph (2)(d) has been deleted. That paragraph reads:

“disputes arising out of or concerning jurisdiction or rights claimed or exercised by Canada in respect of the conservation, management or exploitation of the living resources of the sea, or in respect of the prevention or control of pollution or contamination of the marine environment in marine areas adjacent to the coast of Canada.” This reservation, consequently, applies no longer.]