نوع مقاله : علمی پژوهشی
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله English
نویسنده English
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.
کلیدواژهها English
الف. فارسی
ـ کتاب
ـ مقاله
ب. انگلیسی و فرانسوی
- Books
- Articles
- Documents
- Cases