Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T04:15:18.728Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Remedies in International Law: The Institutional Dilemma edited by Malcolm Evans. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 1998, xxix + 237 pp, ISBN 901362 35 3

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Malgosia Fitzmaurice
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
Book Review
Information
Legal Studies , Volume 19 , Issue 3 , September 1999 , pp. 419 - 425
Copyright
Copyright © Society of Legal Scholars 1999

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. Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports (1996), 66; Legality of the Threat or Use of the Nuclear Weapons,Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports (1996), 226

2. 1950 (c) Pleadings (International Status of South West Africa) 324.

3. R Delson, Letter to the Registrar, 1950 (c) Pleadings (2 Asylum) 227 (7 March 1950).

4. 1970 (c) Pleadings ( 2 Legal Consequences) 639,640,664,672,678,679; see D Shelton ‘The Participation of Non-governmental Organisations in International Judicial Proceedings’ (1994) 88 AJIL 61 1.

5. See on the subject: M Fitzrnaurice ‘Equipping the Court to deal with Developing Areas on International Law: Environmental Law’, in C Peck and R Lee (eds) Increasing the Effectiveness rfl International Court of Justice, Proceedings of the ICJKJNITAR, Colloquium to Celebrate the 50th Anniversary ojthe Court (The HagueEeneva: Martinus NijhoffKJNITAR 1997) pp 41 1-415

6. Preliminary Objections, 11 June 1998 (unpublished) the full text of the judgment availableo n Internet http://www.icj.cij.org/icjwww/i.djou.d.g ment-98061l-content .htm.

7. See eg, p 22 of Cameroon v Nigeria and see Right of Passage over Indian Territory, Preliminary Objections, Judgment ICJ Reports 1957, p 146.

8. http://www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/i.ddoe.r.- 19990303.

9. 25 March 1999, Request For Interpretation of Judgment of 1 1 June 1998 in the Case Concerning the Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria (Cameroon v Nigeria) Preliminary Objections (Nigeria v Cameroon) (text unpublished), full text on Internet: http//www .icj . -cij .org/icj www/ido.. . nc-ijudgment- 19990325.

10. Case Concerning the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (Germany v United Stares of America) Request for Indication of Provisional Measures, 3 march 1999 (text unpublished), full text on Internet: http://www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/ido.. .der- 19990303.

11. Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, Provisional Measures, Order of 10 May 1984, ICJ Reports (1984) 169.

12. See also on the topic in-depth analysis by Sir R Jennings ‘The Role of the International Court of Justice’ (1997) 68 BYIL 1-63.

13. Eg B Kwiatkowska ‘The Saint Vincent and the Grenadines v. Guinea MNSaiga cases ’ (1998) 1 1 Leiden J Int Law 547-565; E Lauterpacht, ‘The First Decision of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: the MNSuigu’ in G Hafner, G Loibl, A Rest, L Sucharipa- Berhman, K Zemanek (eds) Liber Amicorum Professor Ignatz Seidl- Hohenveldern, in honour of his 80th birthday (The HagueLondon: Kluwer, 1998) pp 395-419.

14. The court refused to recognise the international equivalent of ‘actio popularis, or right resident in any member of a community to take legal action in vindication of a public interest’. South West Africa cases, Second Phase, Judgment, ICJ Reports (1966) at 17, para 88; see also Case Concerning East Timor (Portugal v Australia) ICJ Reports (1995) at 104, para 34 where the court said as follows: ‘[sluch a judgment would run directly counter to the well established principle of international law embodied in the court's Statute, namely, that the court can only exercise jurisdiction over Statute with its consent’ (Monetary Gold Removedfrom Rome in 1943, Judgment ICJ Reports (1954), p 34.

15. Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia, Judgment 25 September 1997 (unpublished) the full text of the judgment available on the Internet: http://www.icj-cij.org/ idocket/ihsjudgement/ihsjudocontent.html.S everal articles deal with this problem, eg, H Lammers ‘The Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Case seen in Particular from the Perspective of the Law of International Watercourse and the Protection of the Environment’ LJIL VOI 11 (1998) pp 321-345.

16. The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, with Annex A, 19 September 1987,26 ILM 1550.

17. Vienna Convention on the Protection of the Ozone Layer, 22 March 1985,26 ILM 1529.

18. 38 ILM 68 (1999); 37 ILM 1302 (1998); 38 I ILM 489 (1999); 38 ILM 430 (1999); 38 ILM 58 1 (1 999).