The Appeal in Interpretation in the International Jurisdictional Practice

  • Denisa Barbu Valahia University of Targoviste
Keywords: jurisdictional practice, the interpretation, the method, decision, the competence


Apart from other remedies - reviewing or appealing, jurisdictional practice also knows the recourse in interpreting and rectifying errors. Thus, when the IJC had the power to pronounce a decision, it also has the competence to interpret it, as in art. 98 of the ICJ Regulation. The Court may, at the request of either party, interpret one of its judgments if there is a disagreement between the views of the parties as to the meaning of the Court’s judgments. In practice, few interpretations requests are known to the Court. The Permanent Court of International Justice was seized twice with such requests, in 1925, for the interpretation of the judgment of 12 September 1924 in the Neuilly Treaty of Peace, the examination of which was refused because it exceeded the provisions of that judgment and in 1926, concerning the interpretation of the judgment of 25 May 1925 pronounced in the Case of German Interests in Upper Silesia, which was admitted by the Court for consideration. As regards the rectification of errors, this appeal is recognized, unlike the ICJ, only by the ECHR practice, and is governed by the Court’s Rules of Art. 81, according to which the errors of writing or computing and the obvious inaccuracies can be rectified by any jurisdictional body of the ECHR, either ex officio, or at the request of a party. Also, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea in Annex VII art. 12 provides for the option to lodge an appeal for interpretation on the arbitral award issued. Thus, in the event of differences between the parties regarding the interpretation or the method of interpreting the judgment, the interested party has the right to refer the arbitral tribunal of the decision to a request for interpretation.

Author Biography

Denisa Barbu, Valahia University of Targoviste

Valahia University of Targoviste, Faculty of Law and Administrative Sciences, Targoviste, Dambovita


The Peace Treaty of Neiuilly Case, Judgment ICJ, 12 September 1924. Available from: de Neuilly Article_179_Arret.pdf [Accessed 31.03.2012].

Germany Interests in Upper Polish Silesia Case, Judgment ICJ, 25 August 1925. Available from: [Accessed 31.03.2012].

Asylum Case (Columbia v. Peru), Judgment ICJ, 20 November 1950. Available from: [Accessed 31.03.2012].

Convention application on preventing and repressing the genocide crime Case (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), IJC judgment, 27 February 2007. Available from: [Accessed 25 February 2017].

Request for Interpretation Case of the judgment of 20 November 1950 in the Asylum Case Law (Columbia v. Peru), IJC judgment, 27 November 1950. Available from: [Accessed 28 05.2016].

Land and Maritime Border between Cameroon and Nigeria Case (Cameroon v. Nigeria), the IJC Judgment on the preliminary appeals of March 25, 1999. Available from: [Accessed 27 February 2018].

ECHR. Allenet de Ribemont v. France, Judgment of 1995. Available from:{%22itemid%22:[%22001-57914%22]} [Accessed at 27 February 2018].

Badescu Gh, Baiasu C, Barbulescu P. et. al. Mijloace pasnice de reglementare a diferendelor international (documente). Bucharest: Politica; 1984.

ECHR. Curutiu v. Romania, Judgment of 22 October 2002. Available from: [Accessed 27 February 2018].

Regulation (Rules of Procedure) of the UN Tribunal for litigations settlement on January 15th 2010. Available from: Open Element [Accessed 30.05.2017].

Status of the United Nations Tribunal for the Dispute Settlement of March 17, 2009.

Optional Rules of the Permanent Court of Arbitration on Settlement of Disputes between Two States, in force on October 20, 1992. Available from: [Accessed 6th February 2020].

Optional Rules of the Permanent Court of Arbitration regarding arbitration of disputes between two parties, of which only one is a State, in force since 6 July 1993. Available from:, accessed at 01.02.2017 [Accessed 6th February 2020].

Optional Rules of the Permanent Court of Arbitration for International Organizations and States, in force since July 1, 1996. Available from:, accessed at 01.02.2017

How to Cite
Barbu, D. (2020). The Appeal in Interpretation in the International Jurisdictional Practice. LUMEN Proceedings, 10, 269-275.