International Court of Justice

International Court of Justice (ICJ, or the Hague International Court of Justice) established in 1945 is one of the main organs and judicial branch in the United Nation. It legally based on the Statute of International Court of Justice signed in 1945 and Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice signed in 1920, which are unitary parts of United Nation Chapter. The International Court of Justice is composed of 15 judges elected to nine-year terms of office by receiving an absolute majority

INTRODUCTION: International court of justice is a principal judicial organ of United Nations organization and is also known as world court which was established in 1945 by UN charter and began work in 1946. ICJ is successor of permanent court of international justice which was dissolved after the 2nd world war. ICJ is located in The Hague, Netherlands. In judicial settlement, ICJ occupies a prominent position and decides legal issues of general importance. ICJ comprises of fifteen judges who are

1. History and Introduction to the International Court of Justice The traditional establishment of the ad hoc tribunals formed as a permanent “Court of Arbitration”, this organ so formed was under the League of Nations which was later replaced by The International Court of Justice after the World War II [1]. The International court of Justice so formed is the principal judicial organ of the U.N. It is the foundation of June, 1945 which holds seat at The Peace Palace, Hague, Netherlands. It began

Introduction The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is an important organ of the United Nations. Actually it is the UN's principal judicial arm used to foster international peace. It was established after the League of the Nation and its judicial organ the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ) were dissolved after the Second World War, in 1946. Its main purpose is to support the UN (which was formed in 1945) in its endeavour in promoting international peace and law . Important to note

The case presented was in response to the independent declaration of liberation by the government of Kosovo. A demand for an advisory opinion was requested from the International Court of Justice (ICJ). In order to provide this advisory opinion, it should be determined if the International Court of Justice has the jurisdiction in the case being presented. Even though the leading paragraph of Article 96 allows for an advisory opinion to be requested when it comes to “any legal question, the ICJ has

International courts, like all judicial courts, are seen as neutral parties to a dispute. International courts interpret international law and provide an avenue for states to settle their differences. In court, each state should have equal power. The court should not take into account how large or powerful a state is. Justice is supposed to be blind. However, in practice, state power does matter. The International Court of Justice (ICJ), also known as the World Court, is the paramount court of international

International Law International law is the body of legal rules that apply between sovereign states and such other entities as have been granted international personality (status acknowledged by the international community). The rules of international law are of a normative character, that is, they prescribe towards conduct, and are potentially designed for authoritative interpretation by an international judicial authority and by being capable of enforcement by the application of external sanctions

Committee: ICJ Topic A: Haiti v. France Position: Justice of the court Delagate: Kamal Mohamed, Sanford H. Calhoun High School Introduction: The court will be hearing the case of the Republic of Haiti versus the French Republic. The mannor of the case will be concerning the Independence debt of 1825 in which the French Republic issued a tax amount of 90 million gold Francs in the year 1825 due to the Republic of Haiti 's desire to leave the French Empire. The French Republic calculated the amount

When discussing international law, there are two possible situations that generate misunderstanding. One is that consensus over specific cases or universal recognition of certain principles has not been reached among different actors. Therefore the international law fails to provide guidance as to its conception of justice. The other situation is that international law per se is not well respected by the actors in the international community. The credibility and inviolability of law is therefore

State Court. The key factor here is that Medellin being a Mexican national (spending most of his life in the United States) was not provided his rights to contact or inform consular personnel from Mexico concerning his detention in the US. According to Article 36 of the Vienna Convention (Which the US is also a signatory) Medellin should be given his rights to do so. Medellin also claimed that he was in-fact, not informed of this. With the intervention of the International Court of Justice (ICJ)