File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Provisional Measures and the Link Requirement

TitleProvisional Measures and the Link Requirement
Authors
KeywordsArticle 290 UNCLOS
Article 41 ICJ Statute
International Court of Justice
International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
link
provisional measures
Issue Date2020
Citation
Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, 2020, v. 19, n. 2, p. 177-199 How to Cite?
AbstractIn the context of requests for provisional measures, the link requirement has not attracted much scholarly attention and might be regarded as raising limited controversy. However, this article argues that the link is an unnecessary requirement for granting provisional measures by the International Court of Justice and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. First, the function which the link purports to fulfil is already fulfilled by other requirements (i.e., prima facie jurisdiction, plausibility and real and imminent risk of irreparable prejudice). Second, if the link is understood as requiring provisional measures to be tailored to the rights of which protection is sought, the ICJ and ITLOS have the power to indicate measures different from those requested. One may suggest that the link therefore emerges as an unnecessary requirement which overburdens provisional measures proceedings.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/334689
ISSN
2020 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.253

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLando, Massimo-
dc.date.accessioned2023-10-20T06:49:56Z-
dc.date.available2023-10-20T06:49:56Z-
dc.date.issued2020-
dc.identifier.citationLaw and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, 2020, v. 19, n. 2, p. 177-199-
dc.identifier.issn1569-1853-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/334689-
dc.description.abstractIn the context of requests for provisional measures, the link requirement has not attracted much scholarly attention and might be regarded as raising limited controversy. However, this article argues that the link is an unnecessary requirement for granting provisional measures by the International Court of Justice and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. First, the function which the link purports to fulfil is already fulfilled by other requirements (i.e., prima facie jurisdiction, plausibility and real and imminent risk of irreparable prejudice). Second, if the link is understood as requiring provisional measures to be tailored to the rights of which protection is sought, the ICJ and ITLOS have the power to indicate measures different from those requested. One may suggest that the link therefore emerges as an unnecessary requirement which overburdens provisional measures proceedings.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofLaw and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals-
dc.subjectArticle 290 UNCLOS-
dc.subjectArticle 41 ICJ Statute-
dc.subjectInternational Court of Justice-
dc.subjectInternational Tribunal for the Law of the Sea-
dc.subjectlink-
dc.subjectprovisional measures-
dc.titleProvisional Measures and the Link Requirement-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1163/15718034-12341421-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85091152831-
dc.identifier.volume19-
dc.identifier.issue2-
dc.identifier.spage177-
dc.identifier.epage199-
dc.identifier.eissn1571-8034-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats