国际法院对索马里诉肯尼亚案的判决及其对海洋法的影响

IF 0.3 Q4 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Kai-Chieh Chan
{"title":"国际法院对索马里诉肯尼亚案的判决及其对海洋法的影响","authors":"Kai-Chieh Chan","doi":"10.5334/UJIEL.450","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"By its judgement of 2 February 2017, the International Court of Justice took up jurisdiction to adjudicate the maritime dispute between Somalia and Kenya. Notwithstanding surrounding controversies, the Court set out important rules concerning the law of treaties. The main implication of the judgment is that the Court embraced a more objective definition of treaties and identified the significance of context as well as travaux preparatoires in treaty interpretation. By doing so, the Court further established itself as the default adjudicator in law of the sea disputes unless the reservation to its jurisdiction is sufficiently precise. This case note summarises the facts and analyses the potential ramifications of this judgement on international dispute resolution.","PeriodicalId":30606,"journal":{"name":"Utrecht Journal of International and European Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The ICJ’s Judgement in Somalia v. Kenya and Its Implications for the Law of the Sea\",\"authors\":\"Kai-Chieh Chan\",\"doi\":\"10.5334/UJIEL.450\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"By its judgement of 2 February 2017, the International Court of Justice took up jurisdiction to adjudicate the maritime dispute between Somalia and Kenya. Notwithstanding surrounding controversies, the Court set out important rules concerning the law of treaties. The main implication of the judgment is that the Court embraced a more objective definition of treaties and identified the significance of context as well as travaux preparatoires in treaty interpretation. By doing so, the Court further established itself as the default adjudicator in law of the sea disputes unless the reservation to its jurisdiction is sufficiently precise. This case note summarises the facts and analyses the potential ramifications of this judgement on international dispute resolution.\",\"PeriodicalId\":30606,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Utrecht Journal of International and European Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-11-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Utrecht Journal of International and European Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5334/UJIEL.450\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Utrecht Journal of International and European Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/UJIEL.450","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

根据2017年2月2日的判决,国际法院接管了对索马里和肯尼亚之间海事争端的裁决权。尽管存在争议,法院还是制定了有关条约法的重要规则。该判决的主要含义是,法院接受了对条约的更客观的定义,并确定了背景以及准备工作在条约解释中的重要性。通过这样做,法院进一步确立了自己作为海洋法争端默认裁决人的地位,除非对其管辖权的保留足够准确。本案例说明总结了事实,并分析了这一判决对国际争端解决的潜在影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The ICJ’s Judgement in Somalia v. Kenya and Its Implications for the Law of the Sea
By its judgement of 2 February 2017, the International Court of Justice took up jurisdiction to adjudicate the maritime dispute between Somalia and Kenya. Notwithstanding surrounding controversies, the Court set out important rules concerning the law of treaties. The main implication of the judgment is that the Court embraced a more objective definition of treaties and identified the significance of context as well as travaux preparatoires in treaty interpretation. By doing so, the Court further established itself as the default adjudicator in law of the sea disputes unless the reservation to its jurisdiction is sufficiently precise. This case note summarises the facts and analyses the potential ramifications of this judgement on international dispute resolution.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信