To the question of whether to allow the applicant to formulate the new (additional) claims in the course of proceedings, the Permanent Court of International Justice has responded affirmatively. The International Court of Justice seems to depart from the approach adopted by its predecessor, giving considerable preponderance to the limits of the claim as delimited by the terms of the Application, as well as giving a very narrow interpretation of the connection that must exist between the new claim and the one formulated in the Application. This is what makes (almost) impossible the submission of an additional claim. The judgment of 30 November 2010, rendered in the merits of the case concerning Ahmadou Sadio Diallo is the notable example of the application of this approach. The Court emphasizes the disadvantages resulting from the submission of new claims in the course of proceedings. We think that it will not be the case if it is recognized that the new claim is a real affirmative demand, and an incidental proceeding.
Azari, H. (2013). What Remains of New Claims before International Court of Justice?
Some Observations in Light of Judgment of the ICJ
in Ahmadou Sadio Diallo Case
. International Law Review, 30(48), 183-204. doi: 10.22066/cilamag.2013.16350
MLA
Hadi Azari. "What Remains of New Claims before International Court of Justice?
Some Observations in Light of Judgment of the ICJ
in Ahmadou Sadio Diallo Case
". International Law Review, 30, 48, 2013, 183-204. doi: 10.22066/cilamag.2013.16350
HARVARD
Azari, H. (2013). 'What Remains of New Claims before International Court of Justice?
Some Observations in Light of Judgment of the ICJ
in Ahmadou Sadio Diallo Case
', International Law Review, 30(48), pp. 183-204. doi: 10.22066/cilamag.2013.16350
VANCOUVER
Azari, H. What Remains of New Claims before International Court of Justice?
Some Observations in Light of Judgment of the ICJ
in Ahmadou Sadio Diallo Case
. International Law Review, 2013; 30(48): 183-204. doi: 10.22066/cilamag.2013.16350
)