We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This chapter discusses the weight of teachings in the ICJ generally, drawing the conclusion that teachings have generally low weight in the ICJ. Various patterns in the use of teachings are drawn on to support this conclusion. The most striking pattern is the contrast between majority opinions, which almost never cite teachings, and majority opinions, where many judges cite teachings. An attempt is made to explain this, with the most promising explanation being that this is part of the Court’s institutional culture. The Court’s use of teachings is also compared with the use of judicial decisions and works by the International Law Commission, which are generally assigned more weight than teachings. This is because of teachings do not have the official authority of those sources.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.