Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Conflicts between Treaties in International Law

  • Published:
Netherlands International Law Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. A.D. McNair, The Law of Treaties (Oxford, Clarendon Press 1961) pp. 219–222; G. Haraszti, Some Fundamental Problems of the Law of Treaties, transl. by J. Decsenyi (Budapest, Akademiai Kiado 1973) pp. 294–306; T.O. Elias, The Modern Law of Treaties (New York, Dobs Ferry 1974) pp. 54–58; I.M. Sinclair, The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (Dover, NH, Manchester 1984) pp. 93–98; S. Bastid, Les traités dans la vie internationale (Paris, Economica 1985) pp. 161–169; P. Reuter, Introduction au droit des traités (Paris, Presses Universitaires de France 1985) pp. 110–133.

    Google Scholar 

  2. C. Rousseau, ‘De la compatibilité des normes juridiques contradictoires dans l'ordre international’, 39 RGDIP (1932) pp. 133–192; W. Jenks, ‘The Conflict of Law-making Treaties’, 30 BYIL (1953) pp. 401–453; J. Leca, Les techniques de révision des conventions internationales (Paris, Librairie Générate de Droit et de Jurisprudence 1961); K.N. Dahl, ‘The Application of Successive Treaties Dealing with the Same Subject-matter’, 17 Indian Yearbook of International Affairs (1974) pp. 279–318; M. Zuleeg, ‘Vertragskonkurrenz im Völkerrecht. Teil I: Verträge zwischen souveränen Staaten’, 20 GYIL (1977) pp. 246–276; W. Karl, Vertrag und spätere Praxis im Völkerrecht (Berlin, Springer 1983); M. Zuleeg, ‘Vertragskonkurrenz im Völkerrecht. Teil II: Verträge zwischen beliebigen Völkerrechtssubjekten’, 27 GYIL (1984) pp. 367–385; E.W. Vierdag, ‘The Time of the Conclusion of a Multilateral Treaty: Article 30 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and Related Provisions’, 59 BYIL (1988) pp. 92–111; W. Czaplinski and G.M. Danilenko, ‘Conflict of Norms in International Law’, 21 NYIL (1990) pp. 12–28.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Sinclair, op. cit. n. 1, at p. 93.

    Google Scholar 

  4. See Art. 38, para. 1, Statute ICJ, and G.J.H. van Hoof, Rethinking the Sources of International Law (Deventer, Kluwer Law and Taxation 1983).

    Google Scholar 

  5. H. Kelsen, ‘Derogation’, in R.A. Newman, ed., Essays in Jurisprudence in Honor of Roscoe Pound (Indianapolis, IN, American Society of Legal History 1962) pp. 339–361 (reprinted in H. Klecatsky, et al., Die Wiener Rechtstheoretische Schule, Schriften von H. Kelsen, A. Merkl, A. Verdross, Band 2 (Vienna, Europa Verlag 1968) p. 1439).

    Google Scholar 

  6. See also Karl, op. cit. n. 2, at p. 61.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. H.L.A. Hart, The Concept of Law (Oxford, Clarendon Press 1961) pp. 78, 79.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kelsen, op. cit. n. 5, at p. 1438.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kelsen, op. cit. n. 5, at p. 1437.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kelsen, op. cit. n. 5, at p. 1429.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Karl, op. cit. n. 2, at p. 60.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  12. Karl, op. cit. n. 2, at p. 60 (nt. 267); see also Kelsen, op. cit. n. 5, at pp. 1441, 1442.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  13. Hart, op. cit. n. 7, at pp. 90, 92.

  14. Hart, op. cit. n. 7, at p. 79.

  15. Hart, op. cit. n. 7, at pp. 78, 79; Kelsen, op. cit. n. 5, at p. 1429; see also K.C. Wellens, ‘Diversity in Secondary Rules and the Unity of International Law: Some Reflections on Current Trends’, 25 NYIL (1994) p. 7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kelsen, op. cit. n. 5, at p. 1441; Hart, op.cit. n. 7, at pp. 78, 79.

  17. K. Engisch, Einführung in das juristische Denken (Stuttgart, Kohlhammer 1977) pp. 162, 163; Karl, op. cit. n. 2, at pp. 61–66.

    Google Scholar 

  18. A. Gentili, De iure belli libri tres (1612), translation in J.B. Scott, ed., The Classics of International Law, No. 16, Vol. II (New York, Oceana 1964), Book III, ch. XVIII; H. Grotius, De jure belli ac pads libri tres (1646), translation in J.B. Scott, ed., The Classics of International Law, No. 3, Vol. II (1964), Book II, ch. XVI, para. 29, pp. 427, 428; S. Pufendorf, De iure naturae et gentium (1688), translation in J.B. Scott, ed., The Classics of International Law, No. 17, Vol. II (1964), Book V, ch. XII, para. 23; E. de Vattel, Le droit des gens (1758), translation in J.B. Scott, ed., The Classics of International Law, No. 4, Vol. III (1964), Book II, ch. XVII, paras. 311–322.

  19. In chronological order: Q. Wright, ‘Conflicts between International Law and Treaties’, 11 AJIL (1917) pp. 566–579; J. Fischer Williams, ‘The New Doctrine of Recognition’, in Transactions of the Grotius Society (London, Grotius Society 1932) pp. 109–129; Rousseau, loc. cit. n. 2; H. Lauterpacht, ‘The Covenant as the Higher Law’, 17 BYIL (1936) pp. 54–65; H. Lauterpacht, ‘Contracts to Break a Contract’, 52 LQR (1936) pp. 494–529; J.L. Kunz, ‘The Meaning and the Range of the Norm Pacta Sunt Servanda’, 39 AJIL (1945) pp. 180–197; H. Kelsen, ‘Conflicts between Obligations under the Charter of the United Nations and Obligations under other International Agreements’, 10 University of Pittsburgh Law Review (1949) pp. 284–289; H. Aufricht, ‘Supersession of Treaties in International Law’, 37 Cornell Law Quarterly (1951–1952) pp. 655–700; Jenks, op. cit. n. 2; G. Schwarzenberger, International Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals, Vol. 1, 3rd edn. (London, Stevens 1957) pp. 472–487; Leca, op. cit. n. 2, at pp. 151–235; McNair, op. cit. n. 1, at pp. 219–222; F. Capotorti, ‘Interferences dans l'ordre juridique interne entre la convention et d'autres accords internationaux’, in W.J. Ganshof van der Meersch, ed., Les droits de l'homme en droit interne et en droit international: actes du 2me colloque international sur la Convention Européenne des Droits de l'homme, Vienne, 18–20 octobre 1965 (Brussels, Presses Universitairesde Bruxelles 1968) pp. 123–132; Dahl, op. cit. n. 2; Elias, op. cit. n. 1, atpp. 54–58; G.E. do Nascimento e Silva, ‘Le facteur temps et les traités’, RdC (1977) Vol. I, pp. 242–264; Zuleeg (1977), op. cit. n. 2; G. Barile, ‘Structure de l'ordre juridique international’, RdC (1978) Vol. III, pp. 76–78; T. Opsahl, ‘Substantive Rights’, in Proceedings of the Colloquy about the European Convention on Human Rights in Relation to other International Instruments for the Protection of Human Rights Organized by the Government of Greece and the Secretariat General of the Council of Europe, Athens 21–22 September 1978 (Strasbourg, Council of Europe 1979) pp. 21–58; F. Majoros, Les Conventions Internationales en matière de droit privé, Abrégé théorique et traité pratique, Vol. 2, Partie spéciale 1: Le droit des conflits de conventions (Paris, A. Pedone 1980); Karl, op. cit. n. 2; W. Karl, ‘Conflict between Treaties’, in R. Bernhardt, ed., Encyclopedia of Public International Law, Vol. 7 (Amsterdam, North-Holland 1984) pp. 467–473; Sinclair, op. cit. n. 1, at pp. 93–98; Bastid, op. cit. n. 1, at pp. 161–169; Reuter, op. cit. n. 1, at pp. 110–117; Vierdag, op. cit. n. 2; Czaplinski and Danilenko, op. cit. n. 2, at pp. 3–42; E.A. Alkema, ‘De reikwijdte van fundamentele rechten — de nationale en internationale dimensies, preadvies’ [The Scope of Fundamental Rights — The National and International Dimensions, Preliminary Report], in E.A. Alkema, et al., De reikwijdte van fundamentele rechten’, Handelingen NJV, 125 (1995-1) pp. 69–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. The Harvard Draft Convention was prepared by the Research in International Law of the Harvard Law School and published in 29 AJIL (1935), Suppl. No. 4, pp. 1024–1029.

  21. Vienna, 21 March 1986, not yet in force.

  22. For a comparison of the two Vienna Conventions, see G.E. do Nascimento e Silva, ‘The 1969 and the 1986 Conventions on the Law of Treaties: A Comparison’, in: Yoram Dinstein, ed., International Law at a Time of Perplexity: Essays in Honour of Shabtai Rosenne (Dordrecht, Martinus Nijhoff 1989) pp. 461–487.

    Google Scholar 

  23. One of the minor differences is that Art. 103 of the UN Charter is not mentioned in para. 1, but in a new para. 6, see Nascimento e Silva, op. cit. n. 22, at p. 483.

  24. Sinclair, op. cit. n. 1, at pp. 10–21.

  25. ILC, ‘857th Meeting’, ILC Yearbook (1966) Vol. I, Part II, p. 95; ILC, ‘858th Meeting’, ILC Yearbook (1966) Vol. I, Part II, p. 103; H. Waldock, ‘Sixth Report’, ILC Yearbook (1966) Vol. II, pp. 74–77.

  26. ILC, ‘858th Meeting’, supra n. 25.

  27. ‘Reports of the ILC’, ILC Yearbook (1966) Vol. II, p. 214.

  28. About conflict clauses see Rousseau, loc. cit. n. 2, at pp. 154-164; Leca, op. cit. n. 2, at pp. 169–188; Elias, op. cit. n. 1, at pp. 55, 56; Zuleeg (1977), op. cit. n. 2, at pp. 251-255, 259; Karl (1984), op. cit. n. 19, at pp. 471, 472; Czaplinski and Danilenko, op. cit. n. 2, at pp. 13, 14.

  29. H. Waldock, ‘Third Report’, ILC Yearbook (1964) Vol. II, pp. 37, 38; Leca called those clauses ‘Clauses de compatibilité’, see Leca, op. cit. n. 2, at pp. 174–179; and Rousseau, loc. cit. n. 2, at pp. 154–160.

    Google Scholar 

  30. See Art. 30, paras. 3 and 4.

  31. See Art. 34, elaborated in Art. 30, para. 5, last sentence.

  32. Waldock, supra n. 29, at pp. 38–40; Leca called those clauses ‘Clauses d'incompatibilité’, see Leca, op. cit. n. 2, at pp. 179–187; and Rousseau, loc. cit. n. 2, at pp. 160–163.

  33. For example Art. 103 of the UN Charter; Art. 28, paras. 1 and 2, of the 1957 European Convention on Extradition.

  34. Waldock, supra n. 29, at p. 37; repeated in ILC Yearbook (1966) Vol. II, pp. 214, 215. Elias is one of the few authors who extensively discusses the important para. 2, see Elias, op. cit. n. 1, at p. 55.

  35. In full: pacta tertiis nee nocent nee prosunt.

  36. ‘Reports of the ILC’, supra n. 27, at p. 214; Czaplinski and Danilenko, op. cit. n. 2, at p. 15.

  37. E. Scizo, ‘On Art. 103 of the Charter of the UN in the Light of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties’, 38 ÖZÖRV (1987) p. 169 and especially nt. 22 of that page.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Scizo, loc. cit. n. 37, at p. 170.

  39. G. Fitzmaurice, ‘Third Report’, ILC Yearbook (1958) Vol. II, p. 43.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Waldock, supra n. 29, at p. 35.

  41. Czaplinski and Danilenko, op. cit. n. 2, at pp. 16, 17 and the authors mentioned there; Scizo, loc. cit. n. 37, at pp. 169–176; A. Verdross and B. Simma, Universelles Völkerrecht, 3rd edn. (Berlin, Duncker & Humboldt 1984) p. 413; K. Wolfke, ‘Jus Cogens in International law (Regulation and Prospects)’, 6 PYIL (1974) p. 157; J. Sztucki, Jus Cogens and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (Vienna, Springer Verlag 1974) p. 41.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  42. ICJ 4 April, provisional measures (Aerial Incident at Lockerbie), ICJ Reports (1992) pp. 3, 114.

  43. ICJ 4 April, provisional measures (Aerial Incident at Lockerbie), ICJ Reports (1992) pp. 126, 127; see also V. Gowlland-Debbas, ‘The Relationship between the International Court of Justice and the Security Council in the Light of the Lockerbie Case’, 88 AJIL (1994) pp. 643–677, in particular pp. 647, 648, 660 and nt. 93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Draft Art. 14, para. 1, under b; see H. Waldock, ‘Second Report’, ILC Yearbook (1963) Vol. II, p. 53.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Waldock, supra n. 44, at p. 73.

  46. Waldock, supra n. 29, at pp. 34, 35; see also his explanation on pp. 37, 38.

  47. ILC, ‘742nd Meeting’, ILC Yearbook (1964) Vol. I, pp. 121–124; ILC, ‘743rd Meeting’, ILC Yearbook (1964) Vol. I, pp. 127, 131.

  48. ILC, ‘743rd Meeting’, supra n. 47, at p. 127.

  49. PCIJ 30 August 1924, judgment (Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions), PCIJ (1924), Series A, No. 2, p. 31. See also Zuleeg (1977), op. cit. n. 2, at p. 256.

  50. Schwarzenberger, op. cit. n. 19, at pp. 472–487.

  51. For example Czaplinski and Danilenko, op. cit. n. 2, at p. 21; Alkema, op. cit. n. 19, at p. 70.

  52. I. Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law, 4th. edn. (Oxford, Clarendon Press 1990) pp. 624, 625.

    Google Scholar 

  53. F. Vallat, ‘The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969’, 40 Annuaire de l'AAA (1970) p. xxiv.

    Google Scholar 

  54. ILC, ‘743th Meeting’, supra n. 47, at pp. 127, 131.

  55. UNCLOT, ‘Second Session, Vienna, April 9th–May 22th 1969’, Official Records (1969) p. 253; Sinclair, op. cit. n. 1, at p. 97.

  56. Vierdag, op. cit. n. 2, at pp. 95, 96.

  57. UNCLOT, ‘First Session, Vienna, March 26th–May 24th 1968’, Official Records (1969) p. 165.

  58. UNCLOT, ‘Second Session’, supra n. 55, at p. 222.

  59. UNCLOT, ‘Second Session’, supra n. 55, at p. 253.

  60. Zuleeg (1977), op. cit. n. 2, at p. 256.

  61. Sinclair, op. cit. n. 1, at p. 98.

  62. See Art. 2, para. 1, under g, of the 1969 Vienna Convention.

  63. M. Sörensen, ‘Le problème dit du droit intertemporel dans l'ordre international’, 55 Annuaire de l'Idl (1973) p. 54; Dahl, op. cit. n. 2, at p. 282; Czaplinski and Danilenko, op. cit. n. 2, at p. 19.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Vierdag, op. cit. n. 2, at pp. 93, 95.

  65. Vierdag, op. cit. n. 2, at p. 97.

  66. Czaplinski and Danilenko, op. cit. n. 2, at p. 13.

  67. Zuleeg also keeps those two questions carefully separated, see Zuleeg (1977), op. cit. n. 2, at p. 256.

  68. See Zuleeg (1977), op. cit. n. 2, at p. 256.

  69. See Draft Art. 16, paras. 1 and 2, see H. Lauterpacht, ‘First Report’, ILC Yearbook (1953) Vol. II, p. 156; repeated in his ‘Second Report’, ILC Yearbook (1954) Vol. II, p. 133.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Lauterpacht, ‘Second Report’, supra n. 69, at p. 136; see Jenks, op. cit. n. 2, at pp. 401–453.

  71. Jenks, op. cit. n. 2.

  72. Fitzmaurice, ‘Third Report’, supra n. 39, at pp. 41–45; Fitzmaurice, ‘Fourth Report’, ILC Yearbook (1959) Vol. II, pp. 61, 62.

  73. Fitzmaurice, supra n. 39, at p. 43.

  74. Fitzmaurice, supra n. 39, at p. 44.

  75. See Draft Art. 19; Fitzmaurice, supra n. 39, at pp. 27, 28.

  76. Fitzmaurice, supra n. 39, at p. 44.

  77. Fitzmaurice, supra n. 39, at p. 44; ‘Reports of The ILC’, supra n. 27, at p. 217.

  78. ECHR 10 January 1961, dec. adm., 788/60 (Austria/Italy), 4 Yearbook of the European Convention on Human Rights (1961) pp. 138–140.

  79. E. W. Vierdag, ‘Some Remarks about Special Features of Human Rights Treaties’, 25 NYIL (1994) pp. 124, 125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Vierdag, op. cit. n. 79, at p. 134.

  81. Waldock, supra n. 44, at p. 58.

  82. See Draft Art. 18, para. 8; Fitzmaurice, supra n. 39, at pp. 27, 28. For his doubts on this point, see p. 44.

  83. See Czaplinski and Danilenko, op. cit. n. 2, at pp. 22–24.

  84. See ILC, ‘745th–747th, 754th, 764th Meeting’, ILC Yearbook (1964) Vol. I, pp. 140–157; 198–204; 271–274.

  85. As distinct from an amendment which is a revision of an existing treaty between all parties to this treaty, see Art. 40 of the 1969 Vienna Convention.

  86. ILC, ‘754th Meeting’, supra n. 84, at pp. 198–204; ILC, ‘764th Meeting’, supra n. 84, at pp. 271–274.

  87. ‘Reports of the ILC’, supra n. 27, at p. 235.

  88. ILC, ‘746th Meeting’, supra n. 84, at pp. 148, 152; ILC, ‘860th Meeting’, ILC Yearbook (1966) Vol. I, Part II, p. 126.

  89. The ILC member, Tunkin, was the only one to point to the close relationship, see ILC, ‘860th Meeting’, supra n. 88, at p. 126.

  90. Waldock, supra n. 25, at p. 76.

  91. ILC, ‘857th Meeting’, supra n. 25, at p. 97.

  92. Waldock, supra n. 29, at p. 40.

  93. ILC, ‘858th Meeting’, supra n. 25, at p. 104.

  94. Lauterpacht, ‘First Report’, supra n. 69, at pp. 90–166; Lauterpacht, ‘Second Report’, supra n. 69, at pp. 123–139.

  95. Lauterpacht, ‘Second Report’, supra n. 69, at p. 133.

  96. Gentili, op. cit. n. 18, Book III, ch. XVIII.

  97. Grotius, op. cit. n. 18, Book II, ch. XVI, para. 29, pp. 427, 428.

  98. Pufendorf, op. cit. n. 18, Book V, ch. XII, para. 23, pp. 820–824.

  99. De Vattel, op. cit. n. 18, Book II, ch. XVII, paras. 311-322, pp. 218–221.

  100. For example W.E. Hall, A Treatise on International Law, ed. by A. Pearce Higgins, 8th edn. (Oxford, Clarendon Press 1924) pp. 395–397; G. Scelle, ‘Régles générates du droit de la paix’, RdC (1933) Vol. IV, p. 472; McNair, op. cit. n. 1, at p. 222.

  101. Draft Convention on the Law of Treaties, with comment, prepared by the Research in International Law of the Harvard Law School, 29 AJIL (1935) Suppl. No. 4, pp. 661, 662; see for the comment on the Draft Article, pp. 1009–1028.

  102. Lauterpacht, ‘First Report’, supra n. 69, at pp. 156, 158.

  103. Lauterpacht, ‘First Report’, supra n. 69, at pp. 156, 158.

  104. Lauterpacht, ‘First Report’, supra n. 69, at p. 158.

  105. Fitzmaurice, supra n. 39, at pp. 41–43.

  106. ILC Yearbook (1958) Vol. II, p. 42.

  107. Waldock, ‘Second Report’, supra n. 44, at pp. 53–61; idem, ‘Third Report’, supra n. 29, at pp. 34–45; idem, ‘Sixth Report’, supra n. 25, at pp. 74–77.

  108. Waldock, supra n. 44, at p. 56.

  109. See especially: PCIJ 8 December 1927, advisory opinion (Jurisdiction of the European Commission of the Danube), PCIJ (1927), Series B, No. 14; PCIJ 12 December 1934, judgment (Oscar Chinn), PCIJ(1934), Series A/B, No. 63 (where Judges Eysinga and Schucking defended the concept of invalidity in their dissenting opinions, see pp. 132, 148.

  110. ILC, ‘743rd Meeting’, supra n. 47, at p. 126; Waldock, supra n. 29, at p. 35.

  111. Zuleeg (1977), op. cit. n. 2, at p. 250.

  112. ILC, ‘743rd Meeting’, supra n. 47, at p. 126.

  113. Draft Art. 65, para. 4, under c; Waldock, supra n. 29, at p. 35.

  114. See also Zuleeg (1977), op. cit. n. 2, at pp. 262–265.

  115. ILC, ‘743rd Meeting’, supra n. 47, at p. 131.

  116. ILC, ‘857th Meeting’, supra n. 25, at p. 102.

  117. Karl, op. cit. n. 2, at p. 64; see also Karl, op. cit. n. 28, at pp. 470, 471; Zuleeg (1977), op. cit. n. 2, at p. 249; I. Seidl-Hohenveldern, Völkerrecht, 6th edn. (Koln, Heymann 1987) p. 105.

    Google Scholar 

  118. Zuleeg (1977), op. cit. n. 2, at pp. 267, 268; Karl, op. cit. n. 2, at pp. 64, 65.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Nieuwegein, The Netherlands

    Jan B. Mus (practising lawyer)

Authors
  1. Jan B. Mus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Jan B. Mus is a practising lawyer in Nieuwegein. This article is an adapted version of chapter 3 of his dissertation, entitled Verdragsconflicten voor de Nederlandse rechter [Conflicts of Treaties before the Dutch Judge] (Deventer, W.E.J. Tjeenk Willink 1996), defended in February 1996 at the University of Utrecht.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mus, J.B. Conflicts between Treaties in International Law. Neth Int Law Rev 45, 208–232 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0165070X00000218

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0165070X00000218

Keywords

Search

Navigation