Judicial propriety in advisory opinions of the International Court of Justice

Name: Judicial propriety in advisory opinions of the International Court of Justice
Author: Başaran, Halil Rahman

İsim	Judicial propriety in advisory opinions of the International Court of Justice
Yazar	Başaran, Halil Rahman
Basım Tarihi:	2011
Basım Yeri	- Inderscience Publishers
Konu	Advisory opinions, Judicial propriety, Precedent, International court of justice, International public interest, Legal frameworks, Kosovo, Eastern Carelia, International relations, Palestine, International law
Tür	Süreli Yayın
Dil	İngilizce
Dijital	Evet
Yazma	Hayır
Kütüphane:	Özyeğin Üniversitesi
Demirbaş Numarası	2044-7671
Kayıt Numarası	8e36ee99-f965-47f5-9f53-614c9ccb62ff
Lokasyon	Law
Tarih	2011
Notlar	Due to copyright restrictions, the access to the full text of this article is only available via subscription.
Örnek Metin	This paper's focus is on a certain aspect of the Advisory Opinion: The Consistency of the Court with Regard to Judicial Propriety. Apart from the Eastern Carelia and the Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict cases, the Court has always issued its opinion on request. The Court has, whatever the objections, opted for the issuance of opinions. It has consistently followed its own precedent of never finding an obstacle concerning judicial propriety. In that regard, some indications about the term judicial propriety have been given by some advisory opinions. Still, it is not exactly defined. In that connection, the paper engages in that definition and the argument is advanced that judicial propriety is a broad umbrella-concept.
DOI	10.1504/IJPLAP.2011.043855
Cilt	1

Kaynağa git Özyeğin Üniversitesi

Aramaya Dön

Özyeğin Üniversitesi

Kaynağa git

Judicial propriety in advisory opinions of the International Court of Justice

Yazar Başaran, Halil Rahman

Basım Tarihi 2011

Basım Yeri - Inderscience Publishers

Konu Advisory opinions, Judicial propriety, Precedent, International court of justice, International public interest, Legal frameworks, Kosovo, Eastern Carelia, International relations, Palestine, International law

Tür Süreli Yayın

Dil İngilizce

Dijital Evet

Yazma Hayır

Kütüphane Özyeğin Üniversitesi

Demirbaş Numarası 2044-7671

Kayıt Numarası 8e36ee99-f965-47f5-9f53-614c9ccb62ff

Lokasyon Law

Tarih 2011

Notlar Due to copyright restrictions, the access to the full text of this article is only available via subscription.

Örnek Metin This paper's focus is on a certain aspect of the Advisory Opinion: The Consistency of the Court with Regard to Judicial Propriety. Apart from the Eastern Carelia and the Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict cases, the Court has always issued its opinion on request. The Court has, whatever the objections, opted for the issuance of opinions. It has consistently followed its own precedent of never finding an obstacle concerning judicial propriety. In that regard, some indications about the term judicial propriety have been given by some advisory opinions. Still, it is not exactly defined. In that connection, the paper engages in that definition and the argument is advanced that judicial propriety is a broad umbrella-concept.

DOI 10.1504/IJPLAP.2011.043855

Cilt 1