Chapter

Separate Opinion of Judge Higgins Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran v United States of America), Preliminary Objection, Judgment

Rosalyn Higgins Dbe Qc

in Themes and Theories

Published in print August 2009 | ISBN: 9780198262350
Published online March 2012 | e-ISBN: 9780191682322 | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198262350.003.0086
Separate Opinion of Judge Higgins Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran v United States of America), Preliminary Objection, Judgment

Show Summary Details

Preview

In this jurisdictional phase, the International Court of Justice has had to decide whether the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations and Consular Rights between Iran and the United States affords a basis of jurisdiction in respect of any of the claims advanced by Iran. The dispute stemmed from the United States’ claim that Iran was using its destroyed oil platforms for hostile military purposes. In certain other treaties, the phrase ‘interpretation or application’ appears in reverse order, as ‘application or interpretation’. Where the jurisdiction of the Court is contested, the ‘application’ of a treaty can manifestly form one or more of the grounds of objection. There occurs rather more infrequently a preliminary objection whereby one party contends that a treaty claimed by the other party to found the jurisdiction of the Court is non-applicable ratione materiae. Study of such relevant jurisprudence as exists on this point is instructive.

Keywords: International Court of Justice; United States; Iran; oil platforms; jurisdiction; treaties; application; interpretation; ratione materiae; jurisprudence

Chapter.  6601 words. 

Subjects: Public International Law

Full text: subscription required

How to subscribe Recommend to my Librarian

Buy this work at Oxford University Press »

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.