Fragmenting International Law through Compromissory Clauses? Some Remarks on the Decision of the ICJ in the Oil Platforms Case

Enzo Cannizzaro ¹, Beatrice Bonafé ²

Full text available: PDF format ^*

Abstract

This article addresses the role of compromissory clauses in limiting the law applicable by the ICJ to disputes concerning the interpretation and application of treaty provisions. In the Oil Platforms case, the Court essentially tried to avoid such a problematic side-effect of compromissory clauses by relying on principles of treaty interpretation. Accordingly, customary law can be taken into account in order to interpret treaty provisions falling under the Court’s jurisdiction. However, this is only a limited mechanism aiming at balancing the principle of consent (underlying the limited jurisdiction under compromissory clauses) and the need to take other international law rules into account when applying treaty rules to the dispute before it. In particular, there are disputes governed at the same time by treaty rules and customary law, which can hardly be settled on the ground of the former only. An inquiry into the jurisprudence of the ICJ shows that the Court is also prepared to consider that disputes concerning the applicability of a treaty fall within its jurisdiction under compromissory clauses. This may be deemed an important tool at the disposal of the Court in order to avoid the fragmentation of international law under compromissory clauses.

1  Professor of International La. University of Macerata.

2  Researche. University of Macerata.

* The free viewer (Acrobat Reader) for PDF file is available at the Adobe Systems

© 1990-2004 European Journal of International Law
All comments and suggestions should be sent to webmaster
This site is part of the Academy of European Law online, a joint partnership of the Jean Monnet Center at NYU School of Law and the Academy of European Law at the European University Institute.
This file was last modified: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 05:52AM