INTERNATIONAL LAW
KEY ARRESTS 2024-2025
Abstract
This document provides an overview of the key arrests that need to be studied for the exam
of ‘International Law’ or ‘Volkenrecht’ by Professor Dr. Aleyda Nissen. In the document, for
each key arrest, the parties involved, the context, the outcome, and the related legal
(sub)principles are provided.
Hermans M.
Academic year 2024-2025
,CONTENTS
1. Trail Smelter Case (United States v. Canada, 1938-1941)........................................................................................3
2. Handyside v. United Kingdom (App No. 5493/72, 7 December 1976) ....................................................................4
3. Kadi and Al Barakaat International Foundation v. Council and Commission (Case C-402/05 P and Case C-
415/05 P, [2008] ECR I-6351) 4. Kadi v. Council and Commission (Case T-315/01, [2005] ECR II-3659)..................5
5. Advisory Opinion OC-23/17, Requested by the Republic of Colombia (2017) .......................................................6
6. Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras (29 July 1988, Series C No. 4) ............................................................................7
7. Advisory Opinion on the Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence of
Kosovo (2010), ICJ Reports 403 ......................................................................................................................................8
8. Ukraine v. Russia – Allegations of Genocide under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the
Crime of Genocide (Order of 16 March 2022) ..............................................................................................................9
9. Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and
Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), Judgment of 2007, ICJ Reports 43.......................................................... 10
10. Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v.
Myanmar) – Judgment of 22 July 2022 (Preliminary Objections)............................................................................. 11
11. Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v.
Myanmar) – Request for Indication of Provisional Measures (Order of 23 January 2020) .................................... 12
12. Application of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
(Georgia v. Russian Federation), Preliminary Objections Judgment (2011), ICJ Reports 70 .................................. 13
13. Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (New Application 2002) (Democratic Republic of the Congo
v. Rwanda), Jurisdiction and Admissibility (2006), ICJ Reports 6 .............................................................................. 14
14. Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (Congo v. Belgium), Judgment and Separate Opinions (2002), ICJ Reports 3
....................................................................................................................................................................................... 15
15. Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Co. Ltd. (Belgium v. Spain), Judgment (1970), ICJ Reports 3 ................ 16
16. Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua), Compensation,
Judgment (2018), ICJ Reports 15................................................................................................................................. 17
17. Certain Criminal Proceedings in France (Republic of the Congo v. France), Order of 16 November 2010, ICJ
Reports 635................................................................................................................................................................... 18
18. Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Djibouti v. France), Judgment (2008), ICJ
Reports 177................................................................................................................................................................... 19
19. Corfu Channel (United Kingdom v. Albania), Merits Judgment (1949), ICJ Reports 4 ...................................... 20
20. Fisheries Case (United Kingdom v. Norway), Judgment (1951), ICJ Reports 116 .............................................. 21
21. Gabcíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v. Slovakia), Judgment (1997), ICJ Reports 7 ................................... 22
22. Jadhav (India v. Pakistan), Judgment (2019), ICJ Reports 418 ............................................................................ 24
23. Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening), Judgment (2012), ICJ Reports
99................................................................................................................................................................................... 25
24. LaGrand (Germany v. United States), Order for the Indication of Provisional Measures (1999), ICJ Reports 9
....................................................................................................................................................................................... 27
25. LaGrand (Germany v. United States), Judgment (2001), ICJ Reports 466.......................................................... 28
Page 1 of 64
,26. Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion
(2004), ICJ Reports 136 ................................................................................................................................................ 29
27. Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965, Advisory Opinion
(2019), ICJ Reports 95 .................................................................................................................................................. 31
28. Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion (1996), ICJ Reports 226....................... 32
29. Legality of the Threat or Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict, Advisory Opinion (1996), ICJ
Reports 66 ..................................................................................................................................................................... 33
30. Military and Paramilitary Activities in and Against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States), Merits Judgment
(1986), ICJ Reports 14 .................................................................................................................................................. 34
31. Nottebohm (Liechtenstein v. Guatemala), Preliminary Objection (1953), ICJ Reports 111 ............................. 35
32. Nottebohm (Liechtenstein v. Guatemala), Merits Judgment (1955), ICJ Reports 4 ......................................... 36
33. Nuclear Tests Case (New Zealand v. France), Judgment (1974), ICJ Reports 457 ............................................. 37
34. Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay), Judgment (2010), ICJ Reports 14 ............................ 38
35. Questions Relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal), Provisional Measures,
Order of 28 May 2009, ICJ Reports 139 ...................................................................................................................... 39
36. Questions Relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal), Judgment (2012), ICJ
Reports 422................................................................................................................................................................... 40
37. Reparations for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United Nations, Advisory Opinion (1949), ICJ Reports
174................................................................................................................................................................................. 42
38. United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (United States v. Iran), Judgment (1980), ICJ Reports
3 ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 44
39. Legal Status of Eastern Greenland (Denmark v. Norway), Judgment (1933), PCIJ Series A/B No. 53 ............. 46
40. SS Lotus (France v. Turkey), Judgment (1927), PCIJ Series A No. 10 .................................................................. 47
41. United States – Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services, Appellate
Body Report (WT/DS285/AB/R), 7 April 2005 ............................................................................................................ 49
42. Nevsun Resources Ltd v. Araya, Supreme Court of Canada, 2020 SCC 528, February 2020. ........................... 51
42. Reference re Secession of Quebec, 1998 SCC 217, Supreme Court of Canada. ................................................ 53
44. Judgment T-622 of 10 November 2016, Constitutional Court of Colombia. ..................................................... 55
45. Judgment SC-4360 of 5 April 2018, Constitutional Court of Colombia. ............................................................. 57
46. Attorney General v. Adolf Eichmann, District Court of Jerusalem, Criminal Case #40 -61 (1961).................... 59
47. State of the Netherlands v. Urgenda Foundation, Case No. 1900/13520, December 2019. ........................... 61
48. European Court of human rights European climaseniorinnen V Switzerland 2024 .......................................... 63
49. The international Court of Justice advisory opinion legal consequences arising from the policies and
practices of Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory including East Jerusalem 2024 ........................................ 64
Page 2 of 64
, 1. TRAIL SMELTER CASE (UNITED STATES V. CANADA, 1938 -1941)
Parties Involved:
• Party A: United States
• Party B: Canada
Problem:
The case involved environmental harm caused by emissions from a Canadian smelter near the US -Canada
border. The US claimed that air pollution from the smelter, located in Trail, British Columbia, crossed the
border and caused damage to crops and property in the state of Washington. The main legal question was
whether Canada was responsible for the environmental harm caused to the US by pollution crossing the
international border.
Context:
• US Position: The United States argued that Canada was violating international law by permitting the
smelter to release harmful pollutants that affected US territory.
• Canada’s Position: Canada acknowledged the pollution but contended that the smelter was operating
within the norms of its country and did not intend to harm the United States. Canada also argued that
it had no intention to allow such harm.
Verdict:
• The Tribunal ruled that Canada was responsible for the pollution and ordered compensation for
damages caused by the smelter emissions. It was decided that Canada had a duty to prevent pollution
from crossing the border, based on the principle of state responsibility for transboundary harm.
• The tribunal set out principles for dealing with environmental damage between states, specifically
affirming that a state must ensure that activities within its jurisdiction do not cause harm to other
states.
Principle of Law:
• Principle: State Responsibility for Transboundary Harm
• Sub-principles: The case helped to develop the precautionary principle and the idea of preventative
measures in environmental law.
• The decision established an important precedent for international environmental law, specifically
regarding the obligations of states to prevent cross-border environmental harm and hold states
accountable for damages resulting from such activities.
Page 3 of 64
KEY ARRESTS 2024-2025
Abstract
This document provides an overview of the key arrests that need to be studied for the exam
of ‘International Law’ or ‘Volkenrecht’ by Professor Dr. Aleyda Nissen. In the document, for
each key arrest, the parties involved, the context, the outcome, and the related legal
(sub)principles are provided.
Hermans M.
Academic year 2024-2025
,CONTENTS
1. Trail Smelter Case (United States v. Canada, 1938-1941)........................................................................................3
2. Handyside v. United Kingdom (App No. 5493/72, 7 December 1976) ....................................................................4
3. Kadi and Al Barakaat International Foundation v. Council and Commission (Case C-402/05 P and Case C-
415/05 P, [2008] ECR I-6351) 4. Kadi v. Council and Commission (Case T-315/01, [2005] ECR II-3659)..................5
5. Advisory Opinion OC-23/17, Requested by the Republic of Colombia (2017) .......................................................6
6. Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras (29 July 1988, Series C No. 4) ............................................................................7
7. Advisory Opinion on the Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence of
Kosovo (2010), ICJ Reports 403 ......................................................................................................................................8
8. Ukraine v. Russia – Allegations of Genocide under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the
Crime of Genocide (Order of 16 March 2022) ..............................................................................................................9
9. Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and
Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), Judgment of 2007, ICJ Reports 43.......................................................... 10
10. Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v.
Myanmar) – Judgment of 22 July 2022 (Preliminary Objections)............................................................................. 11
11. Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v.
Myanmar) – Request for Indication of Provisional Measures (Order of 23 January 2020) .................................... 12
12. Application of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
(Georgia v. Russian Federation), Preliminary Objections Judgment (2011), ICJ Reports 70 .................................. 13
13. Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (New Application 2002) (Democratic Republic of the Congo
v. Rwanda), Jurisdiction and Admissibility (2006), ICJ Reports 6 .............................................................................. 14
14. Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (Congo v. Belgium), Judgment and Separate Opinions (2002), ICJ Reports 3
....................................................................................................................................................................................... 15
15. Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Co. Ltd. (Belgium v. Spain), Judgment (1970), ICJ Reports 3 ................ 16
16. Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua), Compensation,
Judgment (2018), ICJ Reports 15................................................................................................................................. 17
17. Certain Criminal Proceedings in France (Republic of the Congo v. France), Order of 16 November 2010, ICJ
Reports 635................................................................................................................................................................... 18
18. Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Djibouti v. France), Judgment (2008), ICJ
Reports 177................................................................................................................................................................... 19
19. Corfu Channel (United Kingdom v. Albania), Merits Judgment (1949), ICJ Reports 4 ...................................... 20
20. Fisheries Case (United Kingdom v. Norway), Judgment (1951), ICJ Reports 116 .............................................. 21
21. Gabcíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v. Slovakia), Judgment (1997), ICJ Reports 7 ................................... 22
22. Jadhav (India v. Pakistan), Judgment (2019), ICJ Reports 418 ............................................................................ 24
23. Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening), Judgment (2012), ICJ Reports
99................................................................................................................................................................................... 25
24. LaGrand (Germany v. United States), Order for the Indication of Provisional Measures (1999), ICJ Reports 9
....................................................................................................................................................................................... 27
25. LaGrand (Germany v. United States), Judgment (2001), ICJ Reports 466.......................................................... 28
Page 1 of 64
,26. Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion
(2004), ICJ Reports 136 ................................................................................................................................................ 29
27. Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965, Advisory Opinion
(2019), ICJ Reports 95 .................................................................................................................................................. 31
28. Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion (1996), ICJ Reports 226....................... 32
29. Legality of the Threat or Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict, Advisory Opinion (1996), ICJ
Reports 66 ..................................................................................................................................................................... 33
30. Military and Paramilitary Activities in and Against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States), Merits Judgment
(1986), ICJ Reports 14 .................................................................................................................................................. 34
31. Nottebohm (Liechtenstein v. Guatemala), Preliminary Objection (1953), ICJ Reports 111 ............................. 35
32. Nottebohm (Liechtenstein v. Guatemala), Merits Judgment (1955), ICJ Reports 4 ......................................... 36
33. Nuclear Tests Case (New Zealand v. France), Judgment (1974), ICJ Reports 457 ............................................. 37
34. Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay), Judgment (2010), ICJ Reports 14 ............................ 38
35. Questions Relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal), Provisional Measures,
Order of 28 May 2009, ICJ Reports 139 ...................................................................................................................... 39
36. Questions Relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal), Judgment (2012), ICJ
Reports 422................................................................................................................................................................... 40
37. Reparations for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United Nations, Advisory Opinion (1949), ICJ Reports
174................................................................................................................................................................................. 42
38. United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (United States v. Iran), Judgment (1980), ICJ Reports
3 ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 44
39. Legal Status of Eastern Greenland (Denmark v. Norway), Judgment (1933), PCIJ Series A/B No. 53 ............. 46
40. SS Lotus (France v. Turkey), Judgment (1927), PCIJ Series A No. 10 .................................................................. 47
41. United States – Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services, Appellate
Body Report (WT/DS285/AB/R), 7 April 2005 ............................................................................................................ 49
42. Nevsun Resources Ltd v. Araya, Supreme Court of Canada, 2020 SCC 528, February 2020. ........................... 51
42. Reference re Secession of Quebec, 1998 SCC 217, Supreme Court of Canada. ................................................ 53
44. Judgment T-622 of 10 November 2016, Constitutional Court of Colombia. ..................................................... 55
45. Judgment SC-4360 of 5 April 2018, Constitutional Court of Colombia. ............................................................. 57
46. Attorney General v. Adolf Eichmann, District Court of Jerusalem, Criminal Case #40 -61 (1961).................... 59
47. State of the Netherlands v. Urgenda Foundation, Case No. 1900/13520, December 2019. ........................... 61
48. European Court of human rights European climaseniorinnen V Switzerland 2024 .......................................... 63
49. The international Court of Justice advisory opinion legal consequences arising from the policies and
practices of Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory including East Jerusalem 2024 ........................................ 64
Page 2 of 64
, 1. TRAIL SMELTER CASE (UNITED STATES V. CANADA, 1938 -1941)
Parties Involved:
• Party A: United States
• Party B: Canada
Problem:
The case involved environmental harm caused by emissions from a Canadian smelter near the US -Canada
border. The US claimed that air pollution from the smelter, located in Trail, British Columbia, crossed the
border and caused damage to crops and property in the state of Washington. The main legal question was
whether Canada was responsible for the environmental harm caused to the US by pollution crossing the
international border.
Context:
• US Position: The United States argued that Canada was violating international law by permitting the
smelter to release harmful pollutants that affected US territory.
• Canada’s Position: Canada acknowledged the pollution but contended that the smelter was operating
within the norms of its country and did not intend to harm the United States. Canada also argued that
it had no intention to allow such harm.
Verdict:
• The Tribunal ruled that Canada was responsible for the pollution and ordered compensation for
damages caused by the smelter emissions. It was decided that Canada had a duty to prevent pollution
from crossing the border, based on the principle of state responsibility for transboundary harm.
• The tribunal set out principles for dealing with environmental damage between states, specifically
affirming that a state must ensure that activities within its jurisdiction do not cause harm to other
states.
Principle of Law:
• Principle: State Responsibility for Transboundary Harm
• Sub-principles: The case helped to develop the precautionary principle and the idea of preventative
measures in environmental law.
• The decision established an important precedent for international environmental law, specifically
regarding the obligations of states to prevent cross-border environmental harm and hold states
accountable for damages resulting from such activities.
Page 3 of 64
