header-logo header-logo

01 March 2024 / Marc Weller
Issue: 8061 / Categories: Features , Profession , International justice , International
printer mail-detail

Reversal of fortune for Ukraine at the ICJ

161575
Marc Weller considers the latest development in Ukraine v Russia
  • Analysis of the ICJ’s recent judgment on its jurisdiction in Ukraine’s case against the Russian Federation following the February 2022 invasion.
  • Considers how Ukraine might approach the case, and notes the high threshold for intent.

After its much-observed order on interim measures of protection for Gaza, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has rendered a further judgment in a genocide case. The judgment concerns its jurisdiction in the action brought by Ukraine against the Russian Federation just two days after the armed invasion of 24 February 2022.

Ukraine v Russia

The judgment will have caused some consternation in Kyiv. The court removed the very essence of the Ukrainian case against the Russian Federation brought under Art IX of the Genocide Convention. The applicant alleged the Russian Federation wrongly claimed Ukraine had conducted a campaign of genocide against Russian speakers in its provinces of Luhansk and Donetsk in justification of its invasion. Hence, the Russian Federation could

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll