International Law Review

International Law Review

The Case of “Certain Iranian Assets” in the International Court of Justice: Deviation from Stare Decisis or Res Judicata?

Document Type : academic

Author
Amir Maghami
Department of Law, Faculty of Administrative Science and Economics, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, iran
10.22066/cilamag.2024.2022358.2510
Abstract
In the jurisdictional phase of the case of "Certain Iranian Assets," the International Court of Justice (ICJ/ the Court) held that the "commercial nature of the action" carried out by the Central Bank of Iran was sufficient to assess this institution as protected by the Treaty of Amity between Iran and the United States. However, in its subsequent judgment on the merits, the Court's standard shifted to focus on the "function" of this institution, deviating from its previous decision. This article, relying on precedent and doctrine, examines whether the Court is permitted to deviate from its precedent. It argues that when the issue has not changed, the Court's meaning and interpretation of a treaty must remain valid, unless there is a reasonable justification for deviating from the previous interpretation. In the present case, it appears that the Court, by deviating from its earlier decision, disregarded the principle of res judicata and the formal standards governing the matter. However, this deviation secured a greater interest, namely that the property of the Iranian Central Bank is absolutely sovereign, and as a result, the Bank enjoys the benefits of sovereign immunity under customary international law. This development has been influential in how Iran's interests are pursued before the Court.
Keywords
International Court of Justice
Sovereign Immunity
Judicial Precedent
Res Judicata
Stare Decisis
Interpretation on Treaties

Subjects

  1. - Books

    1. Beckett, William Eric, “Les Questions d'Interet general au point de vue juridique dans la Jurisprudence de la Cour permanente de Justice International (Vol. 39),” in: Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law. Hague: the Hague Academy of Internatinal Law, 1932.
    2. Brown, Chester, “Article 59,” in: The Statute of the International Court of Justice: A Commentary, Eds: Andreas Zimmermann, et al. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019.
    3. Romano, Cesare P. R., “The Rule of Prior Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies: Theory and Practice in International Human Rights Procedures,” in: International Courts and the Development of International Law, Nerina Boschiero et al. (Eds). The Hague: Springer, 2013.
    4. Rosene, Shabtai, Essays on International Law and Practice. Leiden: Martinus Nijhuf Publications, 2007
    5. Rossene, Shabtai, The Perplexities Of Modern International Law, General Course On Public International Law. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2002.
    6. Shahabuddeen, Mohamed, Precedent in The World Court. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
    7. Webb, Philippa, International Judicial Integration and Fragmentation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016.

     

    - Articles

    1. Acquaviva, Guido and Fausto Pocar, “Stare decisis,” Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, retrieved from: https://opil.ouplaw.com/display/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e1683?prd=MPIL#, accessed on April 17, 2024.
    2. Brown, Chester, “The Inherent Powers of International Courts and Tribunals,” British Year Book of International Law, no. 76 (2005).
    3. Devaney, James Gerard, “The role of precedent in the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice: A constructive Interpretation,” Leiden Journal of International Law 35 (2022).
    4. Guillaume, Gilbert, “The Use of Precedent by International Judges and Arbitrators,” Journal of International Dispute Settlement 2, no. 1 (2011).
    5. Scobbie, Iain, “Res Judicata, Precedent and the International Court: A Preliminary Sketch”, Australian Yearbook of International Law 20 (1999).

     

    - Documents

    1. International Law Commission, Conclusions of the work of the Study Group on the Fragmentation of International Law: Difficulties arising from the Diversification and Expansion of International Law, 2006.
    2. Huber, Max, Discours Prononcie Parm M. Huber, President De La Cour Permanente Justice Internationale, Lors De L'ouverture De La Deuxime Période Presidentielle, Speeches Made And Documents Read Before The Court, Series C, No. 7-1, PCIJ, 1925.
    3. ICJ, Certain Iranian Assets, Application, 2016.
    4. ICJ, South West Africa, Dissenting Opinion of Judge Tanaka, 1966.
    5. ICJ, South West Africa, Separate Opinion of Judge ad hoc Van Wyk, 1966.
    6. ICJ, Certain Iranian Assets, Sparate Opinion of Judge Bennouna, 2023.
    7. ICJ, Certain Iranian Assets, Sparate Opinion of Judge Yusuf, 2023.
    8. ICJ, Certain Iranian Assets, Sparate Opinion of Judge Salam , 2023.
    9. ICJ, Certain Iranian Assets, Opinion Individuelle De M. Le Juge Ad Hoc Momtaz, 2023.
    10. ICJ, Certain Iranian Assets, Sparate Opinion of Judge Nolte, 2023.

     

    - Cases

    1. PCIJ, 1923, Series A, No. 1, S.S. “Wimbledon”.
    2. PCIJ, Series A, No. 11, 1927.
    3. PCIJ, Series B, No. 4, 1923.
    4. PCIJJ, Advisory Committee of Jurists, Documents Presented to the Committee Relating to Existing Plans for the Establishment of a Permanent Court ofInternational Justice, HMSO (London: 1920).
    5. ICJ, Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of Guinea v. Democratic Republic of the Congo), Judgement, 2010.
    6. ICJ, Application for Revision and Interpretation of the Judgment of 24 February 1982 in the Case concerning the Continental Shelf (Tunisia/Libyan Arab Jamahiriya) (Tunisia v. Libyan Arab Jamahiriya), 1985.
    7. ICJ, Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), Judgment, 2007.
    8. ICJ, Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Croatia v. Serbia), Judgment, 2008.
    9. ICJ, Case Concerning Oil Platforms, Judgement, 1996.
    10. ICJ, Certain Iranian Assets, Judgment, 2019.
    11. ICJ, Certain Iranian Assets, Judgment, 2023.
    12. ICJ, Effects of Awards of Compensation made by the United Nations Administrative Tribunal, advisory opinion, 1954.
    13. ICJ, Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria, Judgment, 1998.
    14. ICJ, Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970), Advisory Opinion, 1971.
    15. ICJ, Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, 1984.
    16. ICJ, Nottebohm (Liechtenstein v. Guatemala), Judgment, 1955.
    17. ICJ, Nuclear Tests (Australia v. France), Judgment, 1974.
    18. ICJ, South West Africa (Liberia v. South Africa), Judgment, 1966.
    19. ICJ, Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v. Thailand), Judgment, 1961.
    20. Československá Obchodní Banka, A.S. v. The Slovak Republic, ICSID Case No. ARB/97/4, Decision of the Tribunal on Objections to Jurisdiction, 24 May 1999.

  • Receive Date 06 February 2024
  • Accept Date 07 May 2024