Who are "the parties"? Article 31 §3(c) and the "Principle of Systemic Integration" Revisited
(2008) In Netherlands International Law Review 55. p.343-364- Abstract
- Over the last couple of years, international lawyers have hotly debated the correct way to apply Article 31, paragraph 3(c) of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Discussions have focused on the meaning of ‘the parties’. Traditionally this expression has always been interpreted in the stricter sense of all parties to the interpreted treaty. Voices are now raised suggesting a broader interpretation. According to this view, the correct meaning of ‘the parties’ is the two or more parties to a specific dispute. Given that the two interpretations of Article 31, paragraph 3(c) will often be mutually exclusive, international legal literature provokes a review of the possible reasons that give us ground to adopt them. This article... (More)
- Over the last couple of years, international lawyers have hotly debated the correct way to apply Article 31, paragraph 3(c) of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Discussions have focused on the meaning of ‘the parties’. Traditionally this expression has always been interpreted in the stricter sense of all parties to the interpreted treaty. Voices are now raised suggesting a broader interpretation. According to this view, the correct meaning of ‘the parties’ is the two or more parties to a specific dispute. Given that the two interpretations of Article 31, paragraph 3(c) will often be mutually exclusive, international legal literature provokes a review of the possible reasons that give us ground to adopt them. This article provides such a review. It arrives at the conclusion that only the stricter interpretation can be seriously defended as being correct. First, only the stricter interpretation agrees with the clear ordinary meaning of Article 31, paragraph 3(c). Secondly, even assuming that the ordinary meaning of the provision is ambiguous, a strong case can be made in favour of the stricter interpretation using other data of interpretation, such as the context, the object and purpose of the treaty, and the preparatory work. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/1686639
- author
- Linderfalk, Ulf LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2008
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Public international law, Folkrätt
- in
- Netherlands International Law Review
- volume
- 55
- pages
- 22 pages
- publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:77951570909
- ISSN
- 1741-6191
- DOI
- 10.1017/S0165070X08003434
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 87e4a738-3317-4eb0-9598-2c7cd764cf3e (old id 1686639)
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-04 09:26:49
- date last changed
- 2022-10-12 13:07:58
@article{87e4a738-3317-4eb0-9598-2c7cd764cf3e,
abstract = {{Over the last couple of years, international lawyers have hotly debated the correct way to apply Article 31, paragraph 3(c) of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Discussions have focused on the meaning of ‘the parties’. Traditionally this expression has always been interpreted in the stricter sense of all parties to the interpreted treaty. Voices are now raised suggesting a broader interpretation. According to this view, the correct meaning of ‘the parties’ is the two or more parties to a specific dispute. Given that the two interpretations of Article 31, paragraph 3(c) will often be mutually exclusive, international legal literature provokes a review of the possible reasons that give us ground to adopt them. This article provides such a review. It arrives at the conclusion that only the stricter interpretation can be seriously defended as being correct. First, only the stricter interpretation agrees with the clear ordinary meaning of Article 31, paragraph 3(c). Secondly, even assuming that the ordinary meaning of the provision is ambiguous, a strong case can be made in favour of the stricter interpretation using other data of interpretation, such as the context, the object and purpose of the treaty, and the preparatory work.}},
author = {{Linderfalk, Ulf}},
issn = {{1741-6191}},
keywords = {{Public international law; Folkrätt}},
language = {{eng}},
pages = {{343--364}},
publisher = {{Cambridge University Press}},
series = {{Netherlands International Law Review}},
title = {{Who are "the parties"? Article 31 §3(c) and the "Principle of Systemic Integration" Revisited}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0165070X08003434}},
doi = {{10.1017/S0165070X08003434}},
volume = {{55}},
year = {{2008}},
}