Abstract

The present thesis addresses the issue of State succession to international responsibility. The analysis of State practice shows that the solution to the question whether or not there is a succession of States to the consequences of internationally wrongful acts committed by the predecessor State before the date of succession is not uniform ; it depends essentially on the different types of succession of States and the specific circumstances involved. There are many situations where the obligation to repair is transferred to the successor State after the date of succession. Similarly, there are several examples of State practice where the successor State claimed (and received) reparation in the opposite context of internationally wrongful acts committed (before the date of succession) against the predecessor State or one of its nationals. Modern State practice supports the principle of continuity of the obligation to repair and the right to reparation in international law

Details

Actions