Abstract
The Diallo Case is an example of the increasing use of the ICJ in issues on human rights. The Case is remarkable since it is the first time that the Court has fixed an amount of compensation since the Corfu Channel Case (1949). The main focus of the present article is on the principles for determining compensation in the Judgment of 2012, while taking into account the practice by other courts and tribunals. It is argued that awarding of compensation is different from determining issues of substantive law. Judgments on compensation will not be contradictory, but may be inconsistent and may lead to forum shopping. The Judgment shows that the Court had little difficulty in applying the practice by other courts and tribunals as providing guidance, rather than an obstacle in reaching its decision.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
