The dispute between Australia and Japan concerning the whaling in the Antarctic raised a number of issues of treaty interpretation. The article focuses in particular on the role that the unilateral position taken by the different actors involved in the conclusion or the implementation of a treaty can play in the interpretation of its provisions
On March 31, 2014, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) held that Japan’s whaling program, known...
This article examines the current dispute over whaling from the perspective of Japan, a country that...
Despite widespread public interest on the topic of whaling, there isat present relatively little wor...
On 31 March 2014, the International Court of Justice delivered its judgment on the dispute between A...
On 31 March 2014, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Japan’s whaling activities in ...
This article assessing the International Court of Justice's (ICJ) decision on Japanese Antarctic wha...
On May 31, 2010, Australia filed its Application Instituting Proceedings against Japan in the Regist...
In its decision on the Whaling in the Antarctic case, the International Court of Justice used a sop...
The group’s investigations were to determine if the Cessation of whaling in Antarctic waters is a ca...
This Article examines Australia\u27s attempt to protect whales in the Antarctic Southern Ocean, in a...
In March this year the International Court of Justice made a judgment about the case 'Whaling In the...
In May 2010 Australia commenced litigation against Japan in the International Court of Justice over ...
The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties has been applied by international legal scholars, inter...
International law does not provide an adequate enforcement mechanism against illegal whaling. The Ja...
Whaling remains one of the most controversial and divisive aspects of the modern regulation of marin...
On March 31, 2014, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) held that Japan’s whaling program, known...
This article examines the current dispute over whaling from the perspective of Japan, a country that...
Despite widespread public interest on the topic of whaling, there isat present relatively little wor...
On 31 March 2014, the International Court of Justice delivered its judgment on the dispute between A...
On 31 March 2014, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Japan’s whaling activities in ...
This article assessing the International Court of Justice's (ICJ) decision on Japanese Antarctic wha...
On May 31, 2010, Australia filed its Application Instituting Proceedings against Japan in the Regist...
In its decision on the Whaling in the Antarctic case, the International Court of Justice used a sop...
The group’s investigations were to determine if the Cessation of whaling in Antarctic waters is a ca...
This Article examines Australia\u27s attempt to protect whales in the Antarctic Southern Ocean, in a...
In March this year the International Court of Justice made a judgment about the case 'Whaling In the...
In May 2010 Australia commenced litigation against Japan in the International Court of Justice over ...
The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties has been applied by international legal scholars, inter...
International law does not provide an adequate enforcement mechanism against illegal whaling. The Ja...
Whaling remains one of the most controversial and divisive aspects of the modern regulation of marin...
On March 31, 2014, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) held that Japan’s whaling program, known...
This article examines the current dispute over whaling from the perspective of Japan, a country that...
Despite widespread public interest on the topic of whaling, there isat present relatively little wor...