Dissenting Opinion of Judge de Castro

DISSENTIING OPlNION OF JUDGE DE CASTRO

[Translation]

Inits Order of22.June 1973the Court decided that thewrittenpleadings
should first be addressed to the questions of the jurisdiction of the Court
to entertain the dispute and of the admissibility of the Application. The
Court ought therefore to give a decision on these two preliminary ques-
tions.
Nevertheless, the majority of the Court has now decided not to broach

Joint Dissenting Opinion of Judges Onyeama, Dillard, Jiménez de Aréchaga and Sir Humphrey Waldock

JOINT DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGES ONYEAMA,
DILLARD, JIMÉNEZ DE ARECHAGA
AND SIR HUMPHREY WALDOCK

1.In its Judgment the Court decides, ex proprio motu, that the claim
of the Applicant no longer has any object. We respectfully, but vigor-
ously dissent. In registering the reasons for our dissent we propose first

Separate Opinion of Judge Forster (translation)

SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE FORSTER

[Translationj

1voted in favour of the Judgment of 20 December 1974 whereby the
International Court of Justice has brought to an end the proceedings
instituted against France by Australia on account of the French nuclear
tests carried out at Mururoa, a French possession in the Pacific.
The Court finds in this Judgment that the Australian claim "no longer

Dissenting opinion of Judge Gros (translation)

DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE GROS

[Translation f

1. Becauseof theimportance of theJudgment from the standpoint of its
consequencesfor thelawapplicableto thedelimitation of maritime spaces,
1believe it necessary that 1 should set forth the grounds of my dissent.
2. The Parties have submitted to the Chamber some 7,600 pages of
pleadings and 2,000pages of oral arguments together with 300supporting

Links