Skip to content

ACCA Applied Skills · Corporate and Business Law (Global) · International trade, international legal regulation and conflict of laws

In a dispute before an international tribunal, Country A argues that a decision of a previous tribunal must bind the present tribunal as a strict precedent. Which statement best describes the status of judicial decisions in international law?

Judicial decisions are a subsidiary means of determining rules of law and do not bind later tribunals as strict precedent. Treaties and custom are primary sources. Prior decisions are persuasive and often cited, but international law has no formal doctrine of binding precedent.

  1. AThey are a subsidiary means of determining rules of law and do not bind as strict precedentCorrect
  2. BThey are the primary source of international law and bind all later tribunals
  3. CThey have no relevance to international law at all

Explanation

Judicial decisions are treated as a subsidiary means for identifying legal rules, alongside academic writings. There is no strict doctrine of binding precedent in international law, so the claim of Country A fails. They are not irrelevant, since tribunals often refer to them.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on International trade, international legal regulation and conflict of laws shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise International trade, international legal regulation and conflict of lawsFree diagnostic mock

More International trade, international legal regulation and conflict of laws questions