Practice question
The ICJ decides a boundary dispute between States Cedar and Dawn. State Elm was not a party. A minister says Article 59 makes that judgment a binding adjudication of Elm's distinct boundary merely because the legal reasoning is influential. What is correct?
- Every judgment conclusively binds all States on every boundary
- Binding force is limited to the parties and that particular case, although reasoning may have legal significance beyond it
- The judgment has no effect even between Cedar and Dawn
- Article 59 forbids anyone from citing judgments
- Elm automatically loses all international rights
Legal references
- ICJ Statute, Articles 38(1)(d) and 59: https://legal.un.org/avl/pdf/ha/sicj/icj_statute_e.pdf
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.