Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Specific
Statute Provision Text
Provision
A treaty shall be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to the terms of the
VCLT Article 31(1)
treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose
The context for the purpose of the interpretation of a treaty shall comprise, in addition to the text, including its
preamble and annexes:
VCLT Article 31(2) xxx
(b) Any instrument which was made by one or more parties in connexion with the conclusion of the treaty and
accepted by the other parties as an instrument related to the treaty
There shall be taken into account, together with the context:
(a) Any subsequent agreement between the parties regarding the interpretation of the treaty or the application of
its provisions;
VCLT Article 31(3)
(b) Any subsequent practice in the application of the treaty which establishes the agreement of the parties
regarding its interpretation;
(c) Any relevant rules of international law applicable in the relations between the parties.
Article 25(1) states that a “Necessity” cannot be invoked as a ground for precluding the wrongfulness of an act
not in conformity with an international obligation of that State unless the act
ARSIWA Article 25(1) (a) is the only way for the State to safeguard an essential interest against a grave and imminent peril; and
(b) does not seriously impair an essential interest of the State or States towards which the obligation exists, or of
the international community as a whole.
Specific
Statute Provision Text
Provision
Ramsar Where a Contracting Party in its urgent national interest, deletes or restricts the boundaries of a wetland included
Convention in the List, it should as far as possible compensate for any loss of wetland resources, and in particular it should
Article 4.2
create additional nature reserves for waterfowl and for the protection, either in the same area or elsewhere, of an
adequate portion of the original habitat.
Legal Provisions Applicant
Case Law and Jurisprudence Applicant
Caroline In 1837, a Canadian Rebel Ship was attacked and sunk by the The Pre-emption may be justified only in cases in which the
Case British with one American crew member on board sparking a Caroline "necessity of that self-defense is instant, overwhelming,
crisis between the US and the UK. The British claim pre- Test and leaving no choice of means, and no moment for
emptive self-defense deliberation".
Gabčikovo- The Republic of Hungary and the Slovak Republic entered Pars. 49-57, The Court notes that the dangers ascribed to the
Nagymaros into an agreement to build 2 dams over the Danube River, one particularly upstream reservoir were mostly of a long-term nature
Dam case each on their side of the border. Due to environmental Par 55. and, above all, that they remained uncertain... It follows
concerns and public pressure, Hungary sought to modify or that, even if it could have been established that the
rescind the treaty raising a plea of a "state of ecological reservoir would ultimately have constituted a "grave
necessity." It claims that building the dam threatens to cause peril" for the environment in the area, one would be
siltation and the deterioration of the water quality in the River bound to conclude that the peril was not "imminent" at
the time at which Hungary suspended and then
abandoned the works relating to the dam.