Treaties As a Source of Jurisdiction, Especially in U.S. Practice (From International Court of Justice at a Crossroads, P 58-81, 1987, Lori Fisler Damrosch, ed. -- See NCJ-122854)

• NCJ Number: 122857
• Author(s): F L Morrison
• Date Published: 1987
• Length: 24 pages
• Sale Source: Transnational Publisher Inc
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

Although the United States has terminated its acceptance of the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, it will continue to be subject to the Court's jurisdiction under the compromissory clauses of 70 treaties.

Abstract

The treaties specify that disputes arising under them may be resolved upon the application of any party. In fact, the United States itself has indicated its intention to submit a dispute under a treaty with Italy to the Court. These treaties have been the main source of jurisdiction for the Court for the past 25 years, in contrast to the hopes of some of the framers of the legal framework on which the Court rests. Nearly 250 separate bilateral and multilateral treaties now specify that the International Court should resolve disputes, and more than 500 treaties carried over from the previous Permanent Court also provide for such jurisdiction. Some treaties contain broad clauses submitting all or most controversies to the Court, while others are limited to the resolution of questions concerning certain subjects or arising out of their own interpretation or application. In addition, some multilateral treaties require the prior submission of the controversy to some other forum and establish the International Court as a kind of appellate court. Footnotes and appended lists of treaties and conventions.