Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Irreparable Damage

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Jurisprudence of the PCIJ and of the ICJ on Interim Measures of Protection

  • 456 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter presents the position of the doctrine and the jurisprudence of the PCIJ and the ICJ regarding the notion of irreparable damage. The interim measures of protection are indicated by the Court, when there is no possibility of restitutio in integrum or of monetary compensation payment. The irreparable prejudice takes place when there is a loss of human life or the threat to life. In order to prevent this situation from happening and together with the requirement of urgency, those two conditions are necessary for the indication of the interim measures.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Chorzów Factory case, PCIJ, Ser. A/No. 9, p. 23.

  2. 2.

    Guggenheim 1932, op.cit., vol. 40, p. 693; Perrin 1926, op.cit. p. 29; Cocâtre-Zilgien 1966, p. 41.

  3. 3.

    Lauterpacht 1958, op.cit. p. 253.

  4. 4.

    Hofmański and Hudson 1936, p. 488.

  5. 5.

    Cocâtre-Zilgien 1966, p. 42.

  6. 6.

    Cot 1973, p. 267.

  7. 7.

    ICJ Reports 1973, pp. 131–132. See. Preliminary report on international liability for damages resulting from international activities for damages resulting from activities not prohibited by international law, A/CN.4/334 24 June 1980, pp. 1–19, and A/CN.4/334/Add.1, 27 June 1980, pp. 1–16, as well as A/CN.4/L.437, 12 July 1989, pp. 21–28 and Yearbook of the ILC, 1985, vol. 11, part one, p. 10.

  8. 8.

    PCIJ, Serie. A/No. 8, p. 7.

  9. 9.

    PCIJ, Serie. A/No. 12, p. 8.

  10. 10.

    PCIJ. Serie. A/B, No. 48, p. 284.

  11. 11.

    Ibid., p. 254.

  12. 12.

    PCIJ. Serie. A/B, No. 79, p. 199.

  13. 13.

    ICJ Reports 1951, pp. 89–94.

  14. 14.

    ICJ Reports 1972, p. 16.

  15. 15.

    Ibid., p. 27.

  16. 16.

    Request for interim measures from New Zealand, Proceedings, vol. II, 1973, p. 50.

  17. 17.

    Action for the management of precautionary measures brought by Australia, Proceedings, vol. I, 1973, p. 55. ICJ Reports 1973, p. 104.

  18. 18.

    French government 1973, p. 21. See de Lacharrière 1973, op.cit., pp. 244–247.

  19. 19.

    Ibid., p. 105.

  20. 20.

    Furet 1966, pp. 169–204.

  21. 21.

    ICJ Reports 1976, p. 7.

  22. 22.

    Ibid., p. 8.

  23. 23.

    Ibid., pp. 7–11; see Bettati 1976, pp. 99–115; Gross 1977, pp. 31–60.

  24. 24.

    ICJ Reports 1976, p. 30.

  25. 25.

    Ibid., p. 37.

  26. 26.

    ICJ Reports 1979, p. 9.

  27. 27.

    Ibid., pp. 19–20.

  28. 28.

    See Fisheries Jurisdiction (United Kingdom v Iceland), 1972 ICJ Reports 11.

  29. 29.

    Ibid., par. 34.

  30. 30.

    Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v Uruguay), 2006 ICJ Report 113, par. [61–2] i 2007 ICJ Reports p. 3, par. [32]; Case Concerning the Application of the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (Georgia v Russia), par. [128]); Construction of a Road in Costa Rica Along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v Costa Rica), 2013 ICJ Reports, p. 398, par. [24]–[25); and Questions Relating to the Seizure and Detention of Certain Documents (Timor-Leste v Australia), 2014 ICJ Reports, p. 147, para [32]. Nuclear Tests (Australia v France), ICJ Reports 1973, p. 103; United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (United States of America v Iran), ICJ Reports 1979, p. 19; Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), ICJ Reports 1993, p. 19; and Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (Paraguay v United States of America), ICJ Reports 1998, p. 36; LaGrand (Germany v United States of America), ICJ Reports 1999, p. 15; Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v Uganda), ICJ Reports 2000, p. 127, para 39.

  31. 31.

    Nuclear Tests (Australia v France), 1973 ICJ Reports, p. 99, [27], [30]); United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (US v Iran), 1979 ICJ Reports, p. 20, [42]: 'with the continuation of the situation, the subject of the present request exposes the human beings concerned to privation, hardship, anguish and even danger to life and health and thus a serious possibility of irreparable harm'; Frontier Dispute (Burkina-Faso v Republic of Mali), 1986 ICJ Reports, p. 10, at [21]; Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria, Provisional Measures, 1996 ICJ Reports p. 13 at [38]; LaGrand (Germany v United States), 1999 ICJ Reports, p. 9, at [24]; Avena and others, (Mexico v United States of America), 2003 ICJ Reports p. 77, at [55].

  32. 32.

    Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Belgium), Provisional Measures, Order of 8 December 2000, ICJ Reports 2000, p. 222; Salkiewicz 1984; Garlicki et al. 2010, p. 833; Garlicki and Hofmański 2011, p. 733; Hofmański 2020, p. 327. See also Salkiewicz 1984, p. 69, concerning “damage not capable of any reparation”.

  33. 33.

    ICJ Reports 2020, pp. 25–28.

  34. 34.

    See Denunciation of the Treaty of November 2nd, 1865, between China and Belgium, PCIJ, ser. A. no 8, p. 7; 8 January 1927; Legal Status of the South-Eastern Territory of Greenland, PCIJ, ser. A/B, no 48, p. 284.

  35. 35.

    PCIJ, ser. A/B, no 79, p. 199.

  36. 36.

    Nuclear Tests case, ICJ Reports 1973, p. 103 and, p. 139. Fisheries Jurisdiction, ICJ Reports 1972, p. 16 and p. 34.

  37. 37.

    See Decision of the Franco-German TAM of 21 July 1920, TAM, Recueil, vol. I, p. 10; Decision of the French-Bulgarian TAM, TAM, Recueil, vol. II, p. 929.

  38. 38.

    Bollecker-Stern 1973, pp. 1–382; Cahier 1977, pp. 409–434.

  39. 39.

    Melescanu 1973, pp. 1–279; Colliard 1962, pp. 41–64.

  40. 40.

    ICJ Reports 1979, pp. 7–21.

References

  • Bettati M (1976) L'affaire du plateau continental de la mer Egée. Annuaire Francais de Droit International, vol. 22, pp. 99–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bollecker-Stern B (1973) Le préjudice dans la théorie de la responsabilité internationale. Pedone, Paris, pp. 1–382

    Google Scholar 

  • Cahier Ph (1977) Le problème de la responsabilité pour risque en droit international. Les relations internationales dans un monde en mutation. Geneva, pp. 409–434

    Google Scholar 

  • Cocâtre-Zilgien A (1966) Les mesures conservatoires decidées par le juge ou par l’arbitre international. Revue Generale de Droit International Public 37: 42

    Google Scholar 

  • Colliard CA (1962) La Convention de Bruxelles relative à la responsabilité des exploitants de navires nucléaires. Annuaire Français de Droit International 8: 41–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cot J-P (1973) Affaires des essais nucléaires, /Australie c. France et Nouvelle-Zelande c. France/, Demandes en indication des mesures conservatoires, Ordonnances du 22 juin 1973. Annuaire Français de Droit International 19: 267

    Google Scholar 

  • de Lacharrière GL (1973) Commentaires sur la position juridique de la France à l'égard de la liceité de ses expériences nucléaires. Annuaire Français de Droit International 19: 244–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falsafi H (1978) L’affaire des essais nucléaires devant la CIJ, thèse, Neuchâtel, p. 48

    Google Scholar 

  • French Government (1973) Le livre blanc sur les essais nucléaires [White Paper on nuclear tests]. Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Furet MF (1966) Expérimentation des armes nucléaires en droit international public. Pedone, Paris, pp. 169–204

    Google Scholar 

  • Garlicki L, Hofmański P (2011) Konwencja o Ochronie Praw Człowieka i Podstawowych Wolności. Tom II. Komentarz do artykułów 19–59 oraz Protokołów dodatkowych [Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Volume II. Commentary on Article 19–59 and Additional Protocols. Beck's Large Commentaries, C.H. Beck, Warsaw, p. 773

    Google Scholar 

  • Garlicki L, Hofmański P, Wróbel A (2010) Konwencja o Ochronie Praw Człowieka i Podstawowych Wolności, Komentarz do artykułów 1–18, Tom I [Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Volume I. Commentary on Art. 1–18]. C.H. Beck, Warsaw, p. 833

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross L (1977) The Dispute between Greece and Turkey Concerning the Continental Shelf in the Aegean. American Journal of International Law 71: 31–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guggenheim P (1932) Cours de la Hayé, 1932, vol. 40, p. 693

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofmański P (2020) Międzynarodowe prawo karne [International Criminal Law], Ed. I. Wolters Kluwer, Warsaw, p. 327

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofmański P, Hudson M (1936) La Cour Permanente de Justice Internationale. Pedone, Paris, p. 488

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauterpacht H (1958) The Development of International Law by the International Court. Stevens and Sons Limited, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Melescanu T (1973) La responsabilité pour dommages nucléaires, thèse no. 225. IUHEI, Geneva, pp. 1–279

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrin G (1926) L’affaire de l’Interhandel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Recueil des Cours (1926) Decision of the Franco-German TAM of 21 July 1920, TAM, Recueil, vol. I, p. 10

    Google Scholar 

  • Recueil des Cours (1926) Decision of the French-Bulgarian TAM, TAM, Recueil, vol. II, p. 929

    Google Scholar 

  • Salkiewicz E (1984) Les mesures conservatoires dans la procédure des deux Cours de La Haye. IUHEI, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Calisia University, Kalisz, Poland

    Ewa Sałkiewicz-Munnerlyn

Authors
  1. Ewa Sałkiewicz-Munnerlyn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ewa Sałkiewicz-Munnerlyn .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 T.M.C. Asser Press and the author

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Sałkiewicz-Munnerlyn, E. (2022). Irreparable Damage. In: Jurisprudence of the PCIJ and of the ICJ on Interim Measures of Protection. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-475-4_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-475-4_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-6265-474-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-6265-475-4

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation