Assignments week 2 uitwerkingen
The Law Governing International Obligations and Dispute
Settlement
Hendriksen: H3, 7, 12.
Part A: True/False Questions
1. Only states have access to the International Court of Justice.
This statement is false. According to art. 34 Statute ICJ, only states can be
parties to a contentious case before the Court. However, art. 65 (1)
Statute ICJ regulates that the Court may give an advisory opinion on any
legal question at the request of a body. According to art. 96 UN-Charter,
the UNGA and UNSC may make such requests.
2. Both signature and ratifcation qualify as means of expressing
consent to be bound.
This statement is true. Art. 11 VCLT regulates the means of expressing the
consent to be bound by a treaty. A state may consent to it and consent
can be expressed by a signature, an exchange of the instrument that
constitute a treaty, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession or any
other means if so agreed.
3. According to the ICJ in the Case Concerning Gabcikovo-Nagymaros
Project, a state of necessity is not a valid ground for the termination
of a treaty.
This statement is true. According to §101. VCLT: mutual consent is needed
for the termination of a treaty. The state of necessity is only mentioned as
a circumstance precluding wrongfulness. It is a valid circumstance in the
law of responsibility but not in the law of treaties.
4. Only injured states are entitled to invoke the responsibility of
another state under public international law.
This statement is false. According to at. 48 Responsibility of states for
international wrongful acts a non-injured state can also invoke the
responsibility of another state.
Part B: Problem questions
1. Assume you work as a junior associate at the Ofce of Legal Afairs
of the State Department of the United States and that you receive
the following e-mail from one of your colleagues who works at the
Department of Transportation.
‘Dear [...],
I am writing to you about the following. I am currently involved in
The Law Governing International Obligations and Dispute
Settlement
Hendriksen: H3, 7, 12.
Part A: True/False Questions
1. Only states have access to the International Court of Justice.
This statement is false. According to art. 34 Statute ICJ, only states can be
parties to a contentious case before the Court. However, art. 65 (1)
Statute ICJ regulates that the Court may give an advisory opinion on any
legal question at the request of a body. According to art. 96 UN-Charter,
the UNGA and UNSC may make such requests.
2. Both signature and ratifcation qualify as means of expressing
consent to be bound.
This statement is true. Art. 11 VCLT regulates the means of expressing the
consent to be bound by a treaty. A state may consent to it and consent
can be expressed by a signature, an exchange of the instrument that
constitute a treaty, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession or any
other means if so agreed.
3. According to the ICJ in the Case Concerning Gabcikovo-Nagymaros
Project, a state of necessity is not a valid ground for the termination
of a treaty.
This statement is true. According to §101. VCLT: mutual consent is needed
for the termination of a treaty. The state of necessity is only mentioned as
a circumstance precluding wrongfulness. It is a valid circumstance in the
law of responsibility but not in the law of treaties.
4. Only injured states are entitled to invoke the responsibility of
another state under public international law.
This statement is false. According to at. 48 Responsibility of states for
international wrongful acts a non-injured state can also invoke the
responsibility of another state.
Part B: Problem questions
1. Assume you work as a junior associate at the Ofce of Legal Afairs
of the State Department of the United States and that you receive
the following e-mail from one of your colleagues who works at the
Department of Transportation.
‘Dear [...],
I am writing to you about the following. I am currently involved in
