The Review – a Legal Remedy against International Law Opposability

  • Florin Octavian Barbu Romanian Academy
  • Cristian Mitroi Valahia University of Targoviste
Keywords: the remedies, sentence, the examination, arbitration agreement, Convention


Legal remedies against opposability are mechanisms that aim at obtaining a court’s withdrawal of its previous decision or the annulment or reformulation of the previously adopted decision. The system of the respective legal means, which, in fact represents different ways of appeal, is incomplete and differs from that provided by the national law. The review is a remedy reserved to sustainable courts, which consists in the possibility for the parties to draw a decision that was previously wrongly pronounced. It is a review of judgments that have been formulated on the basis of erroneous data (facts which at the time of the examination of the case were ignored and subsequently discovered) that played a decisive role in making a decision from an arbitrator or a judge. Art. 61 of the IJC Statute provides that the trial may be started without the consent of the other party and, implicitly, may be opened upon the submission of a unilateral request. As a rule, a review request is examined by the contentious party that issued the decision under review. The review request is solved in two stages. In the first stage, the Chamber or the Grand Chamber can declare of its own motion to reject the application on the ground that nothing justifies its examination. In the second stage, if the application was not rejected, the Registrar shall communicate it to all other interested parties, to submit any written observations within the time limit set by the Judge. The arbitration panels may also be subject to the review procedure in accordance with the conditions laid down in the 1907. Thus, according to Art. 83 of the Convention, in order to be able to use the review of the arbitral award, the parties are obliged to reserve this right in the arbitration agreement, which also stipulates the term in which a request for revision of the sentence may be filed.

Author Biographies

Florin Octavian Barbu, Romanian Academy

Romanian Academy, The Institute of Juridical Research “Andrei Radulescu” Bucharest, Targoviste, Dambovita

Cristian Mitroi, Valahia University of Targoviste

Valahia University of Targoviste


Revision of the Judgment of 11 July 1996 on the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Yugoslavia) IJC Judgment of 3 February 2003. Available from: (accessed at 27. 05.2015).

Request for revision and interpretation of the judgment of 24 February 1982 in the Continental Plain (Tunisia v. Libya), IJC judgment of 10 December 1985. Available from: (accessed at 27. 05.2015).

ECHR, McGinley and Egan v. The United Kingdom, review decision of 28 January 2000.

Popescu C-L. Protectia international a drepturilor omului-surse, institutii, procedure. Bucharest: All Beck; 2000.

Regulation of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS / 8), amended on 17 March 2009. Available from:, accessed at 23.04.2017.

Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia

How to Cite
Barbu, F. O., & Mitroi, C. (2020). The Review – a Legal Remedy against International Law Opposability. LUMEN Proceedings, 10, 276-281.