Chapter

Separate Opinion of Judge Higgins Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran v United States of America), Counter-Claim, Order of 10 March 1998

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/9780198262350.003.0088
Separate Opinion of Judge Higgins Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran v United States of America), Counter-Claim, Order of 10 March 1998

Show Summary Details

Preview

In the latter half of the 1990s, Iran instituted proceedings against the United States claiming breaches by the latter of Article I, Article IV, paragraph 1, and Article X, paragraph 1, of the Treaty of Amity of 1955. The International Court of Justice, having heard the preliminary objections to its jurisdiction of the United States, in its judgment of December 12, 1996, determined that it had jurisdiction ‘to entertain the claims made by the Islamic Republic of Iran under Article X, paragraph 1, of that Treaty’. It found it did not have jurisdiction to entertain the claims under Article I and Article IV, paragraph 1. On June 23, 1997, the United States presented both a defence to Iran’s Memorial and the counter-claim which is the subject of the present Order. In its submissions, the Court was asked to adjudge and declare that Iran had breached its obligations under Article X, generally. In this chapter, the author explains her opinion on the case.

Keywords: International Court of Justice; United States; Iran; breaches; Treaty of Amity; jurisdiction; obligations

Chapter.  3136 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.