Chester Brown
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- January 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780199206506
- eISBN:
- 9780191709708
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199206506.003.0005
- Subject:
- Law, Public International Law
This chapter examines the power of international courts to grant provisional measures and analyses whether there is an emerging common practice. It first describes the purpose of provisional measures ...
More
This chapter examines the power of international courts to grant provisional measures and analyses whether there is an emerging common practice. It first describes the purpose of provisional measures in international adjudication. It then considers the source of the power to grant provisional measures. Many international courts have an express power in their constitutive instruments, but several international courts have exercised the power as an inherent power. The chapter then examines the features common in the exercise of the power by a range of international courts — consideration of the question of jurisdiction over the merits of the dispute; the circumstances relevant to the granting of provisional measures; and the binding quality of provisional measures. Finally, the chapter considers the power of international courts to grant provisional measures ultra petita and proprio motu. It concludes that there is substantial commonality in the practice of international courts concerning provisional measures.Less
This chapter examines the power of international courts to grant provisional measures and analyses whether there is an emerging common practice. It first describes the purpose of provisional measures in international adjudication. It then considers the source of the power to grant provisional measures. Many international courts have an express power in their constitutive instruments, but several international courts have exercised the power as an inherent power. The chapter then examines the features common in the exercise of the power by a range of international courts — consideration of the question of jurisdiction over the merits of the dispute; the circumstances relevant to the granting of provisional measures; and the binding quality of provisional measures. Finally, the chapter considers the power of international courts to grant provisional measures ultra petita and proprio motu. It concludes that there is substantial commonality in the practice of international courts concerning provisional measures.
GEORGE H. ALDRICH
- Published in print:
- 1996
- Published Online:
- March 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780198258056
- eISBN:
- 9780191681776
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198258056.003.0004
- Subject:
- Law, Public International Law, Philosophy of Law
The Algiers Declarations make no direct reference to interim measures that the Iran–United States Claims Tribunal might order, but Article 3, Paragraph 2 of the Claims Settlement Declaration makes an ...
More
The Algiers Declarations make no direct reference to interim measures that the Iran–United States Claims Tribunal might order, but Article 3, Paragraph 2 of the Claims Settlement Declaration makes an indirect reference by providing that the Tribunal ‘shall conduct its business in accordance with the arbitration rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) except to the extent modified by the parties or by the Tribunal to ensure that this agreement can be carried out’. The relevant provision of the UNCITRAL Rules – which is unchanged in the Tribunal Rules – is Article 26. When the Tribunal first addressed a request for interim measures of protection, it based the measures it ordered, not on Article 26, but on its ‘inherent powers’. The Tribunal did not refer to Article 26 in requesting Iran to stay proceedings against E-Systems in an Iranian court that involved the same contract and many of the same issues as E-System’s claims before the Tribunal.Less
The Algiers Declarations make no direct reference to interim measures that the Iran–United States Claims Tribunal might order, but Article 3, Paragraph 2 of the Claims Settlement Declaration makes an indirect reference by providing that the Tribunal ‘shall conduct its business in accordance with the arbitration rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) except to the extent modified by the parties or by the Tribunal to ensure that this agreement can be carried out’. The relevant provision of the UNCITRAL Rules – which is unchanged in the Tribunal Rules – is Article 26. When the Tribunal first addressed a request for interim measures of protection, it based the measures it ordered, not on Article 26, but on its ‘inherent powers’. The Tribunal did not refer to Article 26 in requesting Iran to stay proceedings against E-Systems in an Iranian court that involved the same contract and many of the same issues as E-System’s claims before the Tribunal.
Magdalena Forowicz
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- January 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199592678
- eISBN:
- 9780191595646
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199592678.003.0003
- Subject:
- Law, Human Rights and Immigration
The case law and Statute of the International Court of Justice have filled important gaps in the Court's case law. They have also constituted important milestones in the Court's interpretation and ...
More
The case law and Statute of the International Court of Justice have filled important gaps in the Court's case law. They have also constituted important milestones in the Court's interpretation and development of ECHR. Overall, the ECtHR has treated them as authoritative sources of inspiration and it has rarely disagreed with the ICJ's findings. A survey of the case law reveals that there is no general and coherent approach underpinning the Court's references. Being rather irregular, these references have acquired great importance as a result of the individual developments that they introduced. This chapter discusses a number of these important adaptations introduced in number of areas, including interim measures, the opposability of reservations, and the primacy of the UN Charter.Less
The case law and Statute of the International Court of Justice have filled important gaps in the Court's case law. They have also constituted important milestones in the Court's interpretation and development of ECHR. Overall, the ECtHR has treated them as authoritative sources of inspiration and it has rarely disagreed with the ICJ's findings. A survey of the case law reveals that there is no general and coherent approach underpinning the Court's references. Being rather irregular, these references have acquired great importance as a result of the individual developments that they introduced. This chapter discusses a number of these important adaptations introduced in number of areas, including interim measures, the opposability of reservations, and the primacy of the UN Charter.
Paul Craig
- Published in print:
- 2018
- Published Online:
- March 2021
- ISBN:
- 9780198831655
- eISBN:
- 9780191932311
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780198831655.003.0024
- Subject:
- Law, EU Law
The discussion in the previous chapters focused on the principles of judicial review applied by the EU Courts. Remedies are an equally important part of administrative law. This chapter and that ...
More
The discussion in the previous chapters focused on the principles of judicial review applied by the EU Courts. Remedies are an equally important part of administrative law. This chapter and that which follows will consider the remedies available against the EU and the Member States respectively.
Less
The discussion in the previous chapters focused on the principles of judicial review applied by the EU Courts. Remedies are an equally important part of administrative law. This chapter and that which follows will consider the remedies available against the EU and the Member States respectively.
Bernhard Schima
- Published in print:
- 2019
- Published Online:
- March 2021
- ISBN:
- 9780198794561
- eISBN:
- 9780191927874
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780198759393.003.419
- Subject:
- Law, EU Law
Article 243 EC The Court of Justice of the European Union may in any cases before it prescribe any necessary interim measures.
Article 243 EC The Court of Justice of the European Union may in any cases before it prescribe any necessary interim measures.
Tobias Lock and Denis Martin
- Published in print:
- 2019
- Published Online:
- March 2021
- ISBN:
- 9780198794561
- eISBN:
- 9780191927874
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780198759393.003.571
- Subject:
- Law, EU Law
Everyone whose rights and freedoms guaranteed by the law of the Union are violated has the right to an effective remedy before a tribunal in compliance with the conditions laid down in this ...
More
Everyone whose rights and freedoms guaranteed by the law of the Union are violated has the right to an effective remedy before a tribunal in compliance with the conditions laid down in this Article.
Less
Everyone whose rights and freedoms guaranteed by the law of the Union are violated has the right to an effective remedy before a tribunal in compliance with the conditions laid down in this Article.