Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T14:12:04.385Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The International Court of Justice and Scientific Expertise

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2017

Bruno Simma
Bruno Simma*
Affiliation:
International Court of Justice 2003-2012; University of Munich; William H. Cook Global Law Professor, University of Michigan Law School
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
Fact-Finding in Interstate Disputes
Information
Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting , Volume 106 , 2012 , pp. 230 - 233
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2012

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 Statute of the International Court of Justice, art. 9.

2 Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Arg. v. Uru.), Judgment of 20 April 2010, at http://www.icj-cij.org.

3 The entire material can conveniently be found on the Court’s website.

4 This fact was criticized by several members of the Court, particularly by judges with a common law background who otherwise found themselves satisfied with the parties’ and the Court’s handling of scientific evidence.

5 Jennings, Robert Y., International Lawyers and the Progressive Development of International Law, in Theory of International Law at the Threshold of the 21st Century: Essays in Honour of Krzystof Skubiszewsld 416 (Makarczyk, J. ed., 1996)Google Scholar.

6 Couvreur, Philippe, Le reglement juridictionnel, in Institut Du Droit Economique de La Mer, Le Processus De Delimitation Maritime: Etude d’un Cas Fictif (Colloque International de Monaco Du 27 Au 29 Mars 2003) 349, 384 (2004)Google Scholar.

7 Cf. Tams, Christian, Commentary on Article 50, in the Statute of the International Court of Justice: A Commentary 1109, 1118 (Zimmermann, Andreas, Tomuschat, Christian & Oellers-Frahm, Karin eds., 2006)Google Scholar.

8 An aspect on which the separate opinion of Judge Keith concentrates.

9 Cf. Payne, Cymie, Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay, 105 AJIL 94 (2011)Google Scholar.

10 Langbein, John H., The German Advantage in Civil Procedure, 52 U. Chi. L. Rev. 823, 835 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 Aerial Herbicide Spraying (Ecuador v. Colom.), Whaling in the Antarctic (Austl. v. Japan), Construction of a Road in Costa Rica Along the San Juan River (Nicar. v. Costa Rica).

12 For a succinct overview and references to the pertinent literature on our topic, see Jacur, F. Romanin, Remarks on the Role of Ex Curia Scientific Experts in International Environmental Disputes , in Festschrift for Tullio Treves (forthcoming)Google Scholar.