Case Studies

The Enrica Lexie Case: Jurisdiction, Immunity, and Maritime Security

The Enrica Lexie case remains one of the doctrinal touchstones in maritime law. What began as a tragic misidentification at sea evolved into a decade-long dispute between India and Italy, testing UNCLOS jurisdiction, functional immunity, and the balance between sovereign equality and accountability. The tribunal’s ruling affirmed flag-state authority while requiring compensation, offering enduring lessons for states navigating law, security, and diplomacy at sea.

The Enrica Lexie Case: Jurisdiction, Immunity, and Maritime Security Read More »

Human Rights and Hybrid Campaigns: Georgia v. Russia (II)

The Georgia v. Russia (II) judgment demonstrates how international law adapts to modern hybrid campaigns. By affirming jurisdiction through effective control and recognizing systemic abuses as administrative practice, the European Court of Human Rights confirmed that states remain accountable for human rights violations even when they rely on proxies, displacement, or propaganda to obscure responsibility.

Human Rights and Hybrid Campaigns: Georgia v. Russia (II) Read More »

Innocent Passage, Sovereignty, and Responsibility: The Corfu Channel Case

The Corfu Channel Case (1949) marked the ICJ’s first judgment and remains a doctrinal touchstone in international law. It established that responsibility extends to omissions, affirmed the right of innocent passage, reinforced sovereignty against unilateral self help, and confirmed that liability entails reparation. These principles continue to guide maritime security and state responsibility in contemporary international practice.

Innocent Passage, Sovereignty, and Responsibility: The Corfu Channel Case Read More »

Occupation, Exploitation, and the Limits of Self‑Defense: Lessons from the Congo Case

The ICJ Armed Activities case remains a landmark in international law. By rejecting Uganda’s self-defense claim and affirming sovereignty, the Court clarified rules on occupation, humanitarian law, and resource exploitation in conflict zones—principles that continue to shape maritime security attribution today.

Occupation, Exploitation, and the Limits of Self‑Defense: Lessons from the Congo Case Read More »

Limits of Coastal State Enforcement Jurisdiction in the EEZ: The M/V Saiga (No. 2) Case

The M/V Saiga (No. 2) Case (ITLOS) is a cornerstone of modern maritime law. It reaffirmed that coastal states cannot extend domestic laws into the EEZ, clarified the strict conditions for hot pursuit, and condemned disproportionate use of force at sea. The judgment underscores that navigation rights are safeguarded through UNCLOS and international law, ensuring the oceans remain secure, open, and free for all states.

Limits of Coastal State Enforcement Jurisdiction in the EEZ: The M/V Saiga (No. 2) Case Read More »

The 2016 PCA Award in Philippines v. China: Clarifying Maritime Rights in the South China Sea

The 2016 PCA Award in Philippines v. China reshaped maritime law by rejecting China’s nine dash line claims, clarifying the limits of entitlements under UNCLOS, and stressing environmental protection. Beyond doctrine, it reinforced freedom of navigation, empowered smaller states, and continues to influence disputes worldwide.

The 2016 PCA Award in Philippines v. China: Clarifying Maritime Rights in the South China Sea Read More »

The Caroline Incident (1837) and the Self-Defense Principle in International Law

The 1837 Caroline Incident transformed a border raid into a milestone in international law. From Webster’s correspondence with Ashburton emerged the Caroline Test, necessity and proportionality, as enduring benchmarks for lawful self-defense. Nearly two centuries later, these principles continue to guide states in responding to threats across land, sea, and cyberspace.

The Caroline Incident (1837) and the Self-Defense Principle in International Law Read More »

Sovereignty and Use of Force: Nicaragua v. United States

The ICJ’s ruling in Nicaragua v. United States remains one of the most influential decisions in international law. It clarified the prohibition on the use of force, strengthened the principle of non intervention, and narrowed the scope of collective self defense. At the same time, it revealed the limits of enforcement when powerful states refuse to comply, making it a lasting reminder of both the strength and fragility of international law.

Sovereignty and Use of Force: Nicaragua v. United States Read More »

Scroll to Top