Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-zzh7m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T15:18:02.022Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

International Court of Justice: Judgment in the Case Concerning United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 April 2017

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Judicial and Similar Proceedings
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1980

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.)

Footnotes

*

[Reproduced from the text provided to International Legal Materials by the International Court of Justice. The six conclusions derived from the Court's findings on the merits appear at I.L.M. page 574, together with the separate votes on each conclusion. The separate opinion of Judge Lachs appears at I.L.M. page 575. The dissenting opinion of Judge Morozov appears at page 577, and that of Judge Tarazi at I.L.M. page 581.

[The U.S. application and request for interim measures appear at 18 I.L.M. 1464 and 1482 (1979). The I.C.J. Order on the request for the indication of provisional measures appears at 19 I.L.M. 139 (1980), and the I.C.J. Order on the time-limits for the written proceedings appears at 19 I.L.M. 147 (1980).]

References

1 Ahmed Rechid, “L’Islam et le droit des gens”, 60 Recueil des cours de I’A cademie de droit international, 1937-11, pp. 421 f.

1 Fereydoun Hoveyda (trans. Roger Liddell), The Fall of the Shah, London, 1979, pp. 92 f.

1 Kissinger, H. The White House Years, London, 1979, p. 1262 Google Scholar.

2 L., H. and Mazeaud, J. Traité theoriqué et pratique de la responsabilite civile délictuelle et contractuelle, Tome II, 6th ed., Paris, 1970, p. 552 Google Scholar.

1 Conseil d’Etat, 30 March 1916, Recueil Sirey, 1916, Part III, pp. 17 ff.

2 Maurice Hauriou, note to judgment in question (ibid.)