Max-Planck-Institut für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht Logo Max-Planck-Institut für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht

Sie befinden sich hier: Publikationen Archiv World Court Digest

World Court Digest



III. The International Court of Justice
3. THE PROCEDURE OF THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
3.7. Evidence

¤ Fischeries Jurisdiction
(Spain v. Canada)
Jurisdiction of the Court
Judgment of 4 December 1998
I.C.J. Reports 1998, p. 432

[pp. 450-451] 36. As Spain sees it, Canada has in principle accepted the jurisdiction of the Court through its declaration under Article 36, paragraph 2, of the Statute, and it is for Canada to show that the reservation contained in paragraph 2 (d) thereto does exempt the dispute between the Parties from this jurisdiction. Canada, for its part, asserts that Spain must bear the burden of showing why the clear words of paragraph 2 (d) do not withhold this matter from the jurisdiction of the Court.

37. The Court points out that the establishment or otherwise of jurisdiction is not a matter for the parties but for the Court itself. Although a party seeking to assert a fact must bear the burden of proving it (see Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Jurisdiction and Admissibility, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1984, p. 437, para. 101), this has no relevance for the establishment of the Court's jurisdiction, which is a "question of law to be resolved in the light of the relevant facts" (Border and Transborder Armed Actions (Nicaragua v. Honduras), Jurisdiction and Admissibility, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1988, p. 76, para. 16).

38. That being so, there is no burden of proof to be discharged in the matter of jurisdiction. Rather, it is for the Court to determine from all the facts and taking into account all the arguments advanced by the Parties, "whether the force of the arguments militating in favour of jurisdiction is preponderant, and to 'ascertain whether an intention on the part of the Parties exists to confer jurisdiction upon it"' (Border and Transborder Armed Actions (Nicaragua v. Honduras), Jurisdiction and Admissibility, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1988, p. 76, para. 16; see also Factory at Chorzów, Jurisdiction, Judgment No. 8, 1927, P.C.I.J. Series A, No. 9, p. 32).