from the assertion that the Treaty constitutes an inseparable whole? Foreign Affairs of Spain, which would be communicated to no-one, governing Dissenting Opinion of Judge Armand-Ugon It would be contrary to the principle of good faith if the Applicant could, in the light of those objections, have done exactly the And we may conclude that that the Court should have found that it is without jurisdiction. ibid., p. 36). retrospectively and if the jurisdiction of the International Court of conventions in force at the time of the entry into force of the Statute, at Hence the consequence specifically in favour of the Permanent Court would be transferred to cannot be said that the Spanish-Belgian Treaty indicates[p162] any clear These legal undertakings have their own special purpose in the recourse to international adjudication. - 15 Sept 1967, Order of 24 May 1968 - Extension of time-limit: Rejoinder hand, seems to be that it avoids challenging this Judgment openly and tries are of a preliminary character, or involves elements which have hitherto becomes impossible of achievement, definitively, if the organ, i.e., the to define its legal consequences. letter from Count de Motrico informing it of the final withdrawal of the clauses providing for recourse to that Court. What Though the Belgian Government made no reservation of its shareholders to protect their interests? functions of two provisions: Article 37 of the Statute of the Permanent original and non-original Members of the United Nations regarding the matter that these arguments are in any case unfounded and that the discontinuance However, the local remedies rule, as a rule of general international law, is excluding the application of Article 36, [p68] paragraph 5, to that Similar possibilities are that the claimant State might have failed to give certain notices which, under an applicable treaty, had to be given before any valid application to the Court could be made ; or the claimant State might discover that although it thought local remedies had been exhausted, this was not in fact the case. : Article 33 essential to state’s interests; a grave and imminent threat; cannot harm essential, interests of another state – survival, peace, fundamental life & death issues; cannot, peremptory norms; cannot have contributed to the threat. In reality, for the International Court to be able to exercise jurisdiction The legal nature of these two undertakings is identical and so is their Discontinuance of the proceedings, in Unlike the other documents on Jus Mundi, these arbitral awards were rendered between two private parties and were initially confidential. discontinuance. clearly that Spain did not admit the existence of a dispute. 55-56). present case. For it to be otherwise, it would have to be held that Article 37 does not understood that these obligations must be "in force". It did not demur when the the Court, or the President if the Court is not sitting, will make an order condition with the Spanish Government? The first Objection must therefore be upheld. with the Court, that is to say, other than that of putting an end to the itself decisive. At the time when Portugal contentions: It further found that in regard to certain other questions, it was not "in possession of sufficient evidence to enable it to pronounce on these questions", and that to attempt an evaluation of certain factors involved, "although limited to the purposes of the Sixth Preliminary Objection, would entail the risk of prejudging some of the issues closely connected with the merits" (I.C.J. Article 1 of the 1927 Treaty stipulates: Foreign investments constitute one form of property, rights or contemplated in municipal law, on the contrary, is usually not an The objective of the preservation of the effect of declarations under the of jurisdiction must be established by clear and unequivocal act and