Abstract
The ICJ would seem to offer itself as an obvious arbiter in North-South conflicts about migration law. While the lack of consent to the jurisdiction of the ICJ by potential parties might provide some explanation for the scarcity of migration-related judgments, we seem to be left with the image of a potential unfulfilled. The Court is known as a late adopter of innovations in the sphere of international law, and it treads carefully on its path to judgment. Why do states not resort to it more often on issues related to migration law? This is the question driving the present chapter. In pursuit of an answer, I shall proceed in three overall steps. Following the Introduction, in Section 2, I will establish an overview of the few existing cases with a migration law dimension. In Section 3, I shall test two hypotheses explaining the scarcity of cases. Finally, Section 4 will briefly conclude on this chapter.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
