Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T12:21:49.694Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Inaugural Manfred Lachs Memorial Lecture*

Manfred Lachs and the International Court of Justice as Emerging Constitutional Court of the United Nations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2009

Edward McWhinney
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In this, the inaugural Manfred Lachs Memorial Lecture given at the seat of the International Court of Justice, we celebrate the judicial life and learning, and also the judicial wisdom of the longest-serving judge of the Court and its sometime President, who died on January 14th, 1993. Manfred Lachs came to the Court in February, 1967, having been elected in October, 1966, in the first elections following the Court's politically and, in some elements at least (judicial recusation, as example)legally controversial decision in South West Africa, Second Phase1 which had been rendered only two months before the UN Security Council and General Assembly regular triennial balloting on renewal or replacement of one third of the Court's membership.

Keywords

LachsInternational Court of Justicemotor principlesequitygood faith.
Type
Leading Articles
Information
Leiden Journal of International Law , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , Spring 1995 , pp. 41 - 52
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation of the Leiden Journal of International Law 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. 1966 ICJ Rep. 6.

2. South West Africa cases (Ethiopia v. South Africa; Liberia v. South Africa), Preliminary Objections, Judgment, 1962 ICJ Rep. 151.

3. Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia Notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970). Advisory Opinion, 1971 ICJ Rep. 16.

4. Id., at 303, Dissenting Opinion, Fitzmaurice, J.

5. Nuclear Tests case (Australia v. France), Interim Protection Order of 22 June 1973, 1973 ICJ Rep. 99; Nuclear Tests case (Australia v. France), Judgment of 20 December 1974,1974 ICJ Rep. 253.

6. 1973 ICJ Rep. 99.

7. 1974 ICJ Rep. 253.

8. North Sea Continental Shelf cases (Federal Republic of Germany v. Denmark; Federal Republic of Germany v. The Netherlands), Judgment, 1969 ICJ Rep. 3; id., at 218, Dissenting Opinion, Lachs, J.

9. See, generally, Dicey, A.V., Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution (1st ed. 1885; 9th ed. (E.C.S. Wade), 1939).Google Scholar

10. See, eg., Aegean Sea Continental Shelf case (Greece v. Turkey), Interim Protection Order of 11 September 1976, 1976 ICJ Rep. 3; id., at 20, Separate Opinion, Lachs, J; and case concerning United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (U.S.A. v. Iran), 1980 ICJ Rep. 3; id., at 47, Separate Opinion, Lachs, J.

11. Bedjaoui, M., Remarques sur la creation de Chambres ad hoc an sein de la Cour Internationale de Justice, in C. Philip (Ed.), La juridiction Internationale permanente 73 and 75 (1987).Google Scholar

12. Nuclear Tests case (Australia v. France), 1974 ICJ Rep. 253; and see in particular the remarks by Judge de Castro, id., at 372 and 384 (Dissenting Opinion, de Castro, J).

13. Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua case (Nicaragua v. U.S.A.),Jurisdiction and Admissibility, Judgment, 1984 ICJ Rep. 392, 416–419 (Opinion of Court).

14. Nuclear Tests case (Australia v. France), Judgment, 1974 ICJ Rep. 253 (Opinion of Court as to the binding legal quality of unilateral declarations of state intent); case concerning United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (U.S.A. v. Iran), Judgment, 1980 ICJ Rep. 3; id., at 47, (Separate Opinion, Lachs, J, as to the legally binding effect of an undertaking given publicly by a state and with an intent to be bound).

15. 1974 ICJ Rep. 253.

16. Tribunal Arbitral Pour la Délimitation de la Frontière Maritime Guinée/Guinee-Bissau,Sentence du 14 février 1985, 25 ILM 251 (1986).

17. 1986 ICJ Rep. 14; id., at 170–171 (Separate Opinion, Lachs, J). See also the exchange as to this point between Judge Schwebel, id., at 312–315, and President Elias, id., at 178–80.

18. Declaration of Intervention of the Republic of El Salvador, 1984 ICJ Rep. 215.

19. See note 3, supra.

20. Western Sahara case, Advisory Opinion, 1975 ICJ Rep. 12 (Opinion of Court, Lachs,President).

21. Questions of Interpretation and Application of the 1971 Montreal Convention Arising From the Aerial Incident at Lockerbie (Libya v. U.K.), Provisional Measures, 1992 ICJ Rep. 3.

22. Id., at 26–27 (Separate Opinion, Lachs, J).

23. 1972 ICJ Rep. 46; id., at 74 (Declaration, Lachs, J).

24. Application for Review of Judgment No. 158 of the United Nations Administrative Tribunal, Advisory Opinion (Fasla case), 1973 ICJ Rep. 166. (Opinion of Court, Lachs,President); id., at 214 (Declaration, Lachs, President).

25. Application for Review of Judgment No. 273 of the United Nations Administrative Tribunal, Advisory Opinion (Mortished case), 1982 ICJ Rep. 325; id., at 411 (Dissenting Opinion, Lachs, J).

26. Application for Review of Judgment No. 333 of the United Nations Administrative Tribunal, Advisory Opinion (Yakimetz case), 1987 ICJ Rep. 18; id., at 74 (Declaration,Lachs, J).

27. Kooijmans, P.H., In Memoriam Manfred Lachs, in Manfred Lachs Foundation, Law as a Vehicle for Change, Speeches in Honour of Manfred Lachs 20 (1994).Google Scholar