Dispute Settlement in International Law
- LAST REVIEWED: 12 May 2017
- LAST MODIFIED: 28 March 2018
- DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199796953-0074
- LAST REVIEWED: 12 May 2017
- LAST MODIFIED: 28 March 2018
- DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199796953-0074
The basic principles and methods governing the settlement of international disputes today—particularly interstate disputes—are substantially the same as those that were identified and enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations in 1945. Parties to a dispute are under a duty to settle it in a peaceful way (Article 2, paragraph 3 of the UN Charter). While barred from resorting to armed force, the parties remain however, at least in principle, “masters” of the procedure for dispute settlement, and of the outcome. In the absence of a precise treaty obligation, they are free to decide the particular means of dispute settlement they prefer (Article 33 of the UN Charter). More broadly, any settlement will inevitably depend, directly or indirectly, on the agreement of the parties. Thus, the whole edifice of dispute settlement at the international level is characterized by an inherent tension between a legal duty to settle disputes in a peaceful way and the absence of any real compulsory mechanism that may render such obligation effective. Against this legal background, the notion of dispute settlement covers a great variety of different settlement devices. Such procedures can be distinguished one from the other on the basis of different criteria, such as whether they contemplate the intervention of a third party, whether the settlement is based on the application of rules of international law, or whether the final outcome of the procedure has a binding or nonbinding character. The classification of these different procedures; the identification of their respective merits and shortcomings, in absolute or comparative terms; their suitability in relation to different categories of disputes—these are all issues that have been traditionally the object of a vast body of literature. On a broader perspective, recent trends, which have brought some changes in the field of the international dispute settlement, have also attracted the attention of doctrine. These trends include the progressive institutionalization of the procedures, thanks also to the growing role of international organizations in this area, the multiplication of settlement mechanisms and the ensuing problem of the possible interaction or conflict between them, the creation of new courts and tribunals, and the rise of adjudication as a means of dispute settlement.
Pacific means of dispute settlement are traditionally divided into two groups: diplomatic means and arbitral/judicial means. The main difference lies in the fact that in resorting to diplomatic means, the parties retain control over the outcome of the procedure, since any solution proposed by a third subject will not be binding upon them, whereas in the case of arbitration or adjudication, the parties accept as binding the final solution adopted by the international arbitrator or judge. Although international adjudication has progressively become the object of specialized studies, most general works in the field of dispute settlement continue to address both types of procedures. One of the leading texts is Merrills 2017, which provides a comprehensive analysis of the different methods and of their interaction in particular contexts. A comprehensive account is also provided in Collier and Lowe 1999, although, compared to Merrills 2017, this work devotes less attention to diplomatic means in favor of a detailed study of the arbitral process. Brownlie 2009 and Reisman 2012 provide a concise introduction to the variety of settlement procedures. They both examine the comparative merits of the different procedures, with the former focusing on interstate disputes, and the latter dealing in particular with the resolution of commercial disputes. A historical approach characterizes the work of Caflisch 2001, which assesses the relative importance of the different procedures, taking also into account the developments that took place in this field in the 20th century. A particular place in the literature on dispute settlement is occupied by the UN Handbook on the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes between States (United Nations Office of Legal Affairs 1992), a text whose declared purpose is to contribute to the peaceful settlement of disputes by providing “States parties to a dispute with the information they might need to select and apply procedures best suited to the settlement of particular disputes.” Approaching the study of this subject from a different perspective, political scientists have also given a great contribution to the study of dispute settlement in international relations. It is enough here to refer to Bercovitch, et al. 2009 and Zartman and Rasmussen 2007, which provide a comprehensive overview of the functioning of the various procedures, and of the differences in functions and strategies between them (but for more detailed bibliographical references, see the separate Oxford Bibliographies in International Relations entries “Conflict Management” and “International Negotiation and Conflict Resolution” and the Oxford Bibliographies in Political Science entry “International Conflict Management”).
Bercovitch, Jacob, Victor Kremenyuk, and I. William Zartman, eds. The SAGE Handbook of Conflict Resolution. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2009.
Part III of this book, dealing with “the methods of managing conflicts,” contains an extensive overview of the field from a political science perspective.
Brownlie, Ian. “The Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes.” Chinese Journal of International Law 8.2 (2009): 267–283.
Concise introduction to the system of peaceful settlement of interstate disputes, by an authoritative scholar and practitioner. Useful to undergraduates, it offers an insightful discussion of the comparative merits of arbitration and adjudication.
Caflisch, Lucius. “Cent ans de règlement pacifique des différends interétatiques.” Recueil des Cours 288 (2001): 245–468.
Besides offering an overview of the basic principles and methods, this in-depth analysis provides an historical account of the developments that took place over the course of the 20th century.
Collier, John, and Vaughan Lowe. The Settlement of Disputes in International Law: Institutions and Procedures. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Offers a synthetic overview of the principles and means of dispute settlement. Its main focus is on arbitration and adjudication, discussing in particular the International Court of Justice and arbitral procedure.
Merrills, John Graham. International Dispute Settlement. 6th ed. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2017.
A systematic survey of the different means of dispute settlement, it also addresses the relationship between the various procedures in the context of the law of the sea and in international trade, as well as the role of international organizations. A classic study, the first edition was published in 1991.
Reisman, W. Michael. “The Diversity of Contemporary International Dispute Resolution: Functions and Policies.” Journal of International Dispute Settlement 3.1 (2012): 1–17.
A short and clear map of the basic principles of international dispute settlement. As opposed to Brownlie 2009, its focus is on interstate, mixed, and private international commercial disputes.
United Nations Office of Legal Affairs. Handbook on the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes between States. New York: United Nations, 1992.
Prepared by the Secretary-General at the request of the General Assembly and on close consultation with member states, this text provides a general description of the main characteristics and functions of the different means of settlement. Available online.
Zartman, I. William, and J. Lewis Rasmussen, eds. Peacemaking in International Conflict: Methods and Techniques. 2d ed. Washington, DC: Unites States Institute for Peace, 2007.
Written by political scientists, it offers an analysis of the traditional tools and techniques available for the resolution of international conflict.
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login.
- African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights and the Af...
- Agreements, Bilateral and Regional Trade
- Agreements, Multilateral Environmental
- Applicable Law in Investment Agreements
- Arctic Region
- Armed Opposition Groups
- Aut Dedere Aut Judicare
- Bandung Conference, The
- Children's Rights
- Civil Service, International
- Civil-Military Relations
- Collective Security
- Command Responsibility
- Common Heritage of Mankind
- Complementarity Principle
- Conspiracy/Joint Criminal Enterprise
- Constitutional Law, International
- Consular Relations
- Contemporary Catholic Approaches
- Continental Shelf, Idea and Limits of the
- Cooperation in Criminal Matters, Cross-Border
- Courts, International
- Crimes against Humanity
- Criminal Law, International
- Cultural Rights
- Cyber Warfare
- Debt, Sovereign
- Decolonization in International Law
- Development Law, International
- Disputes, Peaceful Settlement of
- Drugs, International Regulation, and Criminal Liability
- Early 19th Century, 1789-1870
- Ecological Restoration and International Law
- Economic Law, International
- Effectiveness and Evolution in Treaty Interpretation
- Enforced Disappearances in International Law
- Enforcement of Human Rights
- Environmental Compliance Mechanisms
- Environmental Institutions, International
- Environmental Law, International
- European Arrest Warrant
- Extraterritorial Application of Human Rights Treaties
- Feminist Approaches to International Law
- Financial Law, International
- Foreign Investment
- Freedom of Expression
- French Revolution
- General Customary Law
- General Principles of Law
- Georgia and International Law
- Grotius, Hugo
- Habeas Corpus
- History of International Law, 1550–1700
- Hostilities, Direct Participation in
- Human Rights
- Human Rights and Regional Protection, Relativism and Unive...
- Human Rights, European Court of
- Human Rights, Foundations of
- Human Trafficking
- Hybrid International Criminal Tribunals
- Immunity, Sovereign
- Indigenous Peoples
- Institutional Law
- International and Non-International Armed Conflict, Detent...
- International Committee of the Red Cross
- International Court of Justice
- International Criminal Court, The
- International Criminal Law, Complicity in
- International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR)
- International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia ...
- International Humanitarian Law
- International Humanitarian Law, Targeting in
- International Investment Agreements, Fair and Equitable Tr...
- International Investment Arbitration
- International Investment Law, Expropriation in
- International Law, Aggression in
- International Law, Amnesty and
- International Law and Economic Development
- International Law, Anthropology and
- International Law, Big Data and
- International Law, Climate Change and
- International Law, Dispute Settlement in
- International Law, Espionage in
- International Law, Hegemony in
- International Law in Northeast Asia
- International Law, Marxist Approaches to
- International Law, Military Intervention in
- International Law, Monism and Dualism in
- International Law, Peacekeeping in
- International Law, Proportionality in
- International Law, Reasonableness in
- International Law, Recognition in
- International Law, Self-Determination in
- International Law, State Responsibility in
- International Law, State Succession in
- International Law, the State in
- International Law, the Turn to History in
- International Law, Trade and Development in
- International Law, Unequal Treaties in
- International Law, Use of Force in
- International Regulation of the Internet
- International Territorial Administration
- International Trade and Human Rights
- Intervention, Humanitarian
- Investment Protection Treaties
- Islamic International Law
- Islamic Law and Human Rights
- Jurisprudence (Judicial Law-Making)
- Jus Cogens
- Just War
- Law of the Sea
- Law of Treaties, The
- Law-Making by Non-State Actors
- League of Nations, The
- Lebanon, Special Tribunal for
- Legal Status of Military Forces Abroad
- Liability for International Environmental Harm
- Liberation and Resistance Movements
- Maritime Delimitation
- Martens Clause
- Medieval International Law
- Mens Rea, International Crimes
- Middle East Boundaries and State Formation
- Military Necessity
- Military Occupation
- Modes of Participation
- Most-Favored-Nation Clauses
- Multinational Corporations in International Law
- Nationality and Statelessness
- Natural Law
- New Approaches to International Law
- New Haven School of International Law, The
- Non liquet
- Nonstate Actors
- Nuclear Non-Proliferation
- Nuremberg Trials
- Organizations, International
- Pacifism in International Law
- Palestine (and the Israel Question)
- Peace Treaties
- Political Science, International Law and
- Private Military and Security Companies
- Protection, Diplomatic
- Public Interest, Human Rights, and Foreign Investment
- Rational Choice Theory
- Recognition of Foreign Penal Judgments
- Rendition, Extraterritorial Abduction, and Extraordinary R...
- Russian Approaches to International Law
- Sanctions, International
- Soft Law
- Space Law
- Spanish School of International Law (c. 16th and 17th Cent...
- Sports Law, International
- State of Necessity
- Superior Orders
- Teaching International Law
- Territorial Title
- Theory, Critical International Legal
- Tokyo Trials, The
- Transnational Corruption
- Treaty Interpretation
- Ukrainian Approaches
- Underwater Cultural Heritage
- Unilateral Acts
- United Nations and its Principal Organs, The
- Universal Jurisdiction
- Uti Possidetis Iuris
- Vatican and the Holy See
- Victims’ Rights, International Criminal Law, and Proceedin...
- Watercourses, International
- Western Sahara