VidhiAagaz
International Journal ofLaw Management & Humanities
ISSN 2581-5369 · Open access
International Journal ofLaw Management & Humanities
Open accessResearch PaperVol. 5 No. IV (2022)pp. 1069–1077

Binding Value of the ICJs order of Provisional Measures

SP
Sumi PantPh.D. Scholar at Department of Law, University of Lucknow, India
View PDF
1,316views779downloads
Published 7 August 2022 · pp. 1069–1077 · Vol. 5 No. IV (2022)
Abstract

The significance of temporary restraining orders, sometimes known as provisional measures of protection, is rising in international law. These steps are intended to safeguard the parties' rights until a dispute is settled definitively. It has been disputed whether the Court has the authority to issue temporary remedies since the Permanent Court of International Justice was established in 1921 until it was replaced by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 1945. By ruling that it imposes binding responsibilities on the parties and that non-compliance might result in an instance of state responsibility and a cause of action, the ICJ put an end to that issue in 2001. However, there have still been lingering doubts on the overall efficacy of such interim orders. This article makes an attempt to understand the binding value of such measures and their efficacy.

Keywords
ICJProvisional MeasuresBinding Value

How to cite

Sumi Pant, Binding Value of the ICJs order of Provisional Measures, 5 Int'l J. L. Mgmt. & Human. 1069 (2022).

Cite this article

Sumi Pant, Binding Value of the ICJs order of Provisional Measures, 5 Int'l J. L. Mgmt. & Human. 1069 (2022).
Chat with us