International Court of Justice — Procedure — Finality of judgment — Application for revision of a judgment — Statute of the Court, Article 61 — Admissibility of request — Discovery of “new fact” — Whether new fact of such a nature as to be a decisive factor

Jurisdiction — International Court of Justice — Advisory jurisdiction — United Nations General Assembly adopting Resolution ES-10/14 — General Assembly requesting advisory opinion on question set forth in resolution — Competence of Court — Article 65(1) of Statute of International Court of Justice — Competence of General Assembly — United Nations Charter, Articles 96(1), 10 and 11(2) — Whether General Assembly exceeding its competence — Whether General Assembly contravening Article 12(1) of Charter — Interpretation of Article 12 — Validity of request — General Assembly’s Tenth Emergency Special Session — Whether properly seised under Resolution 377 A (V) of matter before Court — Whether question submitted to Court of legal character — Alleged lack of clarity of terms of request — Whether having effect on legal nature of question — Political aspects — Whether depriving question of legal character — Whether depriving Court of competence

Jurisdiction — International Court of Justice — Advisory jurisdiction — Discretionary power — Judicial propriety — Whether compelling reason for Court not to comply with request for advisory opinion — Relevance of Israel’s lack of consent to judicial settlement — Whether advisory opinion impediment to solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict — Whether Court having sufficient information and evidence — Relevance of opinion’s usefulness — Whether Israel’s good faith and “clean hands” argument compelling reason for Court to decline request

Territory — Occupied Palestinian Territory — Occupying Power Israel constructing wall in Occupied Palestinian Territory — Whether contrary to international law — Relevant rules and principles of international law — United Nations Charter — Other treaties — Customary international law — Relevant General Assembly and Security Council resolutions adopted pursuant to Charter — Applicability to Palestinian Occupied Territory — Occupied territory — Definition — Status — Territorial acquisition by threat or use of force — Self-determination of peoples — International humanitarian law — International human rights conventions — Whether wall as routed gravely infringing human rights of Palestinians residing in occupied territory — Whether wall necessary to attain Israel’s security objectives — Whether justified by military exigencies, national security or public order

Territory — Status — Occupation — Occupied territories in which Israel having status of occupying Power — Customary international law — Article 42 of Hague Regulations of 1907 — Threat or use of force — Article 2(4) of United Nations Charter — Territorial acquisition resulting from threat or use of force — Illegality — Security Council Resolution 242 (1967) — General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXV) (1970) — Whether wall tantamount to de facto annexation

War and armed conflict — International humanitarian law — Treaties — Fourth Geneva Convention relative to Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, 1949 — Applicability to Occupied Palestinian Territory — Hague Regulations annexed to Fourth Hague Convention on Laws and Customs of Warfare on Land, 1907 — Customary international law

Human rights — International human rights law — Treaties — International human rights conventions to which Israel party — International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 — International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966 — Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989 — Applicability to Occupied Palestinian Territory — Relationship between international humanitarian law and human rights law — Applicability of human rights instruments outside national territory

Human rights — Right of peoples to self-determination — United Nations Charter — General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXV) (1970) — International Covenants on Human Rights, 1966, Article 1 — Right erga omnes — Whether Israel breaching obligation to respect right of Palestinian people to self-determination — Israeli settlements in Occupied Palestinian Territory — Whether contrary to Article 49(6) of Fourth Geneva Convention, 1949 — Legal validity — Whether wall tantamount to de facto annexation — Whether altering demographic composition

Human rights — Rights of Palestinians residing in territory occupied by Israel — Whether Israel’s routed wall gravely infringing those rights — Destruction or requisition of properties — Demographic changes — Right to freedom of movement — Right to work — Right to adequate standard of living — Right to health — Right to education — Hague Regulations, 1907, Articles 46 and 52 — Fourth Geneva Convention, 1949, Articles 53 and 49(6) — Security Council Resolutions 446, 452 (1979) and 465 (1980) — International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966, Article 12(1) — International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966, Articles 6, 7, 11, 12, 13 and 14 — United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989, Articles 16,24,27 and 28 — Whether Israel in breach of obligations under international law

Terrorism — War and armed conflict — Israel claiming wall to protect from terrorist attacks — Self-defence — Article 51 of United Nations Charter — Whether relevant — Security Council Resolutions 1368 and 1373 (2001) — Whether Israel could invoke — State of necessity — Whether construction of wall only way for Israel to safeguard essential interest against grave and imminent peril

State responsibility — Legal consequences arising from Israel’s construction of wall — Whether responsibility of Israel engaged under international law — Whether Israel bound to comply with its international obligations — Whether Israel obliged to put an end to any internationally wrongful act — Obligations upon all States under United Nations Charter and international law — Additional obligation upon States parties to Fourth Geneva Convention, 1949 — Obligation upon both Israel and Palestine to observe rules of international humanitarian law — Protection of civilian life — Requirement of implementation in good faith of all relevant Security Council resolutions

Damages — Reparation — Whether Israel under obligation to make reparation for all damage caused by construction of wall — Customary international law — Restitution in kind — Payment of equivalent sum — Compensation in accordance with applicable international law rules

War and armed conflict — Israeli-Palestinian conflict threatening international peace and security — United Nations Charter — United Nations — Organs — General Assembly — Security Council — Article 12 of United Nations Charter — Whether any further action required — Requirement of implementation in good faith of all relevant Security Council resolutions — Security Council Resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) — “Roadmap” approved by Security Council Resolution 1515 (2003) — Negotiated solution to outstanding problems — Establishment of Palestinian State — Peace and security in Middle East region

War and armed conflict — Belligerent occupation — West Bank territories occupied by Israel since 1967 — Whether the law of belligerent occupation still applicable — Hague Regulations on Land Warfare, 1907 — Whether declaratory of customary international law — Geneva Convention No IV respecting the Protection of Civilian Persons, 1949 — Whether applicable — Powers of occupation authorities — Taking of land — Construction of security barrier — Whether permitted — Whether proportionate

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — Customary law — General principles — Proportionality — Whether a general principle of international law — Applicability in Israeli courts — Conditions of proportionality — The law of Israel

War and armed conflict — Belligerent occupation — West Bank territories occupied by Israel since 1967 — Whether the law of belligerent occupation still applicable — Hague Regulations on Land Warfare, 1907 — Whether declaratory of customary international law — Geneva Convention No IV respecting the Protection of Civilian Persons, 1949 — Whether applicable — Powers of occupation authorities — Taking of land — Construction of security barrier — Whether permitted — Whether proportionate

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — Customary law — General principles — Proportionality — Whether a general principle of international law — Applicability in Israeli courts — Conditions of proportionality

International Court of Justice — Advisory jurisdiction — Advisory Opinion on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in Occupied Palestinian Territory — Whether binding on the courts of Israel — Whether to be given any weight — Different factual basis put before different courts — The law of Israel

Economics, trade and finance — Investment protection — Bilateral investment treaty — Effect in national law of party — Provision for ICSID arbitration — Relationship to arbitration provision in contract — Whether one prevailing over the other — Role of national courts — Whether national court can stay proceedings before ICSID tribunal

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — Pakistan — Bilateral investment treaty — Whether part of the law of Pakistan — Whether capable of creating rights under the law of Pakistan — Role of the courts of Pakistan — The law of Pakistan

Arbitration — Jurisdiction — ICSID Convention, Article 41 — Duty of tribunal to judge its own competence — Provisional measures — ICSID Convention — Article 47 — Right to access international adjudication — Whether capable of being constrained by decision of national court — Procedure — Disqualification challenge to arbitration tribunal member — ICSID Convention, Article 57 — ICSID Arbitration Rules, Rule 9(4)

Arbitration — Arbitrators — Composition of arbitration tribunal — Disqualification challenge to member — Publication by member on issues raised in claim — Continuing retainer of member’s law firm by United Mexican States — Appointment of member’s law firm in unrelated NAFTA case in which counsel for respondent was appointed President of Tribunal — No facts to lead to reasonable inference that member will favour respondent on basis of an understanding between member and counsel for respondent — Challenge rejected

Economics, trade and finance — Investment protection — ICSID Convention, Article 25(1) — Interpretation of “investment” — Distinguishable from an ordinary commercial transaction — Investment broadly defined under treaty — Whether contract involved a “claim for money” — Whether contract in the nature of a public law concession

Economics, trade and finance — Investment protection — Forum selection clause — Contractual arbitration clause covering all disputes arising from the contract — Relation to bilateral investment treaty and ICSID arbitration — Whether claims relating to breach of contract and breach of treaty are distinct — Whether contractual arbitration clause includes jurisdiction over treaty claims — Whether ICSID has exclusive jurisdiction over breach of treaty claims — Whether ICSID has concurrent jurisdiction over breach of contract claims — Terms of the contract — Whether the tribunal can decide factual issues with respect to the contract which is subject to another body’s jurisdiction — Relationship between contractual claims and treaty claims — Distinct nature of international law standards

Economics, trade and finance — Investment protection — Bilateral investment treaty — Umbrella clause — Whether elevating alleged contractual breaches into treaty violations — Consequences of such an interpretation — Whether clear evidence existed of an intention to produce such consequences

Economics, trade and finance — Investment protection — Investment — Agreement of 1997 between the Swiss Confederation and the Republic of the Philippines on the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments (“BIT”) — Article 2 — Investment “in the territory” of a Contracting Party — Contract for the provision of services — Performance mostly outside the territory of the host State — Whether an investment in its territory — Part of performance taking place in the host State

Economics, trade and finance — Investment protection — Umbrella clause in investment treaty — Obligation imposed by “umbrella clause” in respect of contractual obligations — Obligation on Philippines to pay monies owing pursuant to contract — Whether enforceable through ICSID arbitration — Effect of exclusive forum clause in the contract

Economics, trade and finance — Investment protection — Expropriation — Whether non-payment of contract debt capable of constituting expropriation

Arbitration — ICSID — Jurisdiction — BIT — Provision for settlement of investment disputes — Whether extending to dispute over breach of contract where no allegation of breach of treaty — Contract containing exclusive forum clause — Whether depriving ICSID tribunal of jurisdiction — Whether requiring stay of proceedings — Essentially contractual claim — Proceedings stayed pending determination of amount payable under terms of CISS Agreement

Arbitration — Procedure — ICSID Arbitration Rules, Article 19 — Stay of proceedings — Exclusive jurisdiction clause binding on parties and applicable to claim — Proceedings stayed pending determination of amount payable

Expropriation — BIT — Article 6 — Whether refusal to pay monies owed under contract amounts to expropriation of property — Mere non-payment of invoices where amount owing is in dispute does not amount to expropriation under terms of BIT

State immunity — Jurisdiction — Doctrine of restrictive immunity — Exception to immunity for civil claims in tort — Tort committed in forum State by agents of defendant State — European Convention on State Immunity, 1972 — Article 11 — Whether now reflecting rule of customary international law — Immunity from civil proceedings in respect of acts of armed forces — Article 31 of Convention — Whether such immunity absolute — Whether any exception for war crimes or crimes against humanity violating jus cogens and not direcdy connected with furtherance of armed conflict — Whether commission of such acts constituting tacit waiver of immunity

State immunity — Jurisdiction — Human rights — Whether State immunity compatible with right of access to courts — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950, Article 6(1) — Exception to immunity for tort claims in civil proceedings

Human rights — Access to courts — European Convention on Human Rights, Article 6(1) — State immunity — Relationship between State immunity and human rights — Nature of prohibition of crimes against humanity — Whether constituting a rule of jus cogens — Whether taking precedence over principle of State immunity

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Crimes against international law — Crimes against humanity and war crimes — Claim for compensation in civil proceedings in tort before municipal courts — Whether commission of such crimes by its armed forces precluding foreign State from relying on State immunity — Whether such exception to immunity now recognized as rule of customary international law

War and armed conflict — Enforcement of the laws of war — Compensation and reparations — Crimes against humanity and war crimes — Claim for compensation brought by relatives of victims before municipal courts — Atrocities committed by German forces during Second World War — The law of Greece

State immunity — Jurisdiction — Doctrine of restrictive immunity — Exception to immunity for civil claims in tort — Tort committed in forum State by agents of defendant State — European Convention on State Immunity, 1972 — Article 11 — Whether now reflecting rule of customary international law — Immunity from civil proceedings in respect of acts of armed forces — Article 31 of Convention — Whether such immunity absolute — Whether any exception for war crimes or crimes against humanity violating jus cogens and not directly connected with furtherance of armed conflict — Whether commission of such acts constituting tacit waiver of immunity

State immunity — Jurisdiction — Human rights — Whether State immunity compatible with right of access to courts — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950, Article 6(1) — Exception to immunity for tort claims in civil proceedings

Human rights — Access to courts — European Convention on Human Rights, Article 6(1) — State immunity — Relationship between State immunity and human rights — Nature of prohibition of crimes against humanity — Whether constituting a rule of jus cogens — Whether taking precedence over principle of State immunity

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Crimes against international law — Crimes against humanity and war crimes — Claim for compensation in civil proceedings in tort before municipal courts — Whether commission of such crimes by its armed forces precluding foreign State from relying on State immunity — Whether such exception to immunity now recognized as rule of customary international law

War and armed conflict — Enforcement of the laws of war — Compensation and reparations — Crimes against humanity and war crimes — Claim for compensation brought by relatives of victims before municipal courts — Atrocities committed by German forces during Second World War — The law of Greece

State immunity — Immunity from execution — Human rights — Whether State immunity compatible with right of access to courts — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950, Article 6(1) — Exception to immunity for tort claims in civil proceedings

Human rights — Access to courts — European Convention on Human Rights, Article 6(1) — State immunity — Relationship between State immunity and human rights — Nature of prohibition of crimes against humanity — Whether constituting a rule of jus cogens — Whether taking precedence over principle of State immunity

State immunity — Jurisdiction — Doctrine of restrictive immunity — Exception to immunity for civil claims in tort — European Convention on State Immunity, 1972 — Article 11 — Whether now reflecting rule of customary international law — Immunity from civil proceedings in respect of acts of armed forces — Article 31 of Convention — Whether such immunity absolute — Whether any exception for war crimes or crimes against humanity violating jus cogens and not directly connected with furtherance of armed conflict — Whether commission of such acts constituting tacit waiver of immunity

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Crimes against international law — Crimes against humanity and war crimes — Claim for compensation in civil proceedings in tort before municipal courts — Whether commission of such crimes by its armed forces precluding foreign State from relying on State immunity — Whether such exception to immunity now recognized as rule of customary international law

War and armed conflict — Enforcement of the laws of war — Compensation and reparations — Crimes against humanity and war crimes — Claim for compensation brought by relatives of victims before municipal courts — Atrocities committed by Nazi German forces during Second World War — Whether reparations claims by individuals precluded by London Debt Agreement, 1953 — Whether Federal Republic of Germany liable as successor State following entry into force of Treaty of Final Settlement with respect to Germany, 1990 — The law of the Federal Republic of Germany

State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — General rule that foreign State immune unless an exception to immunity is applicable — United Kingdom State Immunity Act 1978 — Proceedings for registration of judgment against foreign State given by court in that foreign State — Whether State entitled to immunity — Whether proceedings relating to commercial transaction

State immunity — Immunity from execution — Bank accounts — Property of central bank — Source of funds and purpose for which those funds intended irrelevant — Other bank accounts — Whether in use for commercial purposes — Dormant accounts — Evidence of foreign State’s Head of Mission — The law of England

State immunity — Immunity from execution — Enforcement of arbitration award against foreign State — Bank accounts — Property of central bank — Source of funds and purpose for which those funds intended irrelevant — Whether funds intended for use for commercial purposes — Human rights — Whether restriction on enforcement against assets contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights, Article 6 or Article 1 of the First Protocol — Evidence of foreign State’s Head of Mission

Human rights — Access to courts — State immunity — Whether restriction on enforcement of judgment against assets of a foreign State a restriction on right of access to court — European Convention on Human Rights, Article 6 — Whether engaged — Whether limitation legitimate and proportionate — Right to property — European Convention on Human Rights, First Protocol, Article 1

Economics, trade and finance — Investment protection — ICSID — Enforcement of ICSID award — State immunity — The law of England

State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Alleged violations of jus cogens — Torture — Claims for damages for torture committed outside forum State — Whether defendant State immune — General provision for immunity — Whether exception for jus cogens violation — State Immunity Act 1978, Sections 1(1) and 5 — Whether Section 1(1) of the Act should be read subject to implied exception for claims which alleged torture — Whether English courts having jurisdiction

State immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Officials — Definition of State — Whether including officials — Whether officials acting in official capacity entitled to same immunity as State — Whether torture official act attracting immunity ratione materiae — Whether exception applying — State Immunity Act 1978 — Whether English courts having jurisdiction

State immunity — Human rights — Relationship between law of State immunity and human rights — State Immunity Act 1978 — Whether Act disproportionate — Whether Act inconsistent with a peremptory norm of international law prohibiting torture — Whether application of Act infringing claimants' right of access to a court under Article 6 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Whether English courts having jurisdiction to entertain claims — Whether States recognizing or giving effect to international law obligation to exercise jurisdiction over claims arising from alleged breaches of peremptory norms of international law — Sources of international law — Treaties — Judicial decisions — Reputed publicists — Whether recognizing exception to State immunity for torture cases in civil proceedings — Whether ancillary procedural rule entitling or requiring States to assume civil jurisdiction over other States in alleged torture cases

Human rights — Freedom from torture — Torture Convention, 1984 — Claimants alleging systematic torture by State officials while in custody of foreign State — Article 14 of Torture Convention, 1984 — Interpretation — Whether other States required to provide remedy for acts of torture committed outside their territory — Jus cogens prohibition of torture — Whether taking precedence over other rules of international law — Nature of State immunity international law rules — Whether States recognizing or giving effect to international law obligation to exercise jurisdiction over claims arising from alleged breaches of peremptory norms of international law — Whether entitlement to immunity when sued for torture

Human rights — Right of access to court — Kingdom of Saudi Arabia claiming immunity for itself and its officials — Whether immunity incompatible with claimants' right of access to court — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950, Article 6

Relationship of international law and municipal law — State Immunity Act 1978 — Interpretation — Human Rights Act 1998, Section 3 — Whether Section 1(1) of State Immunity Act 1978 could be read in way compatible with Convention rights — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950, Article 6 — Whether State Immunity Act 1978 could be interpreted in manner permitting immunity to be refused to Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and its officials in respect of torture claims — The law of England