Vol. 28 (2021)
Case law comments

Compensation and punitive rights in International Law: Commentary on the Judgment of the International Court of Justice on “Compensation Owed by the Republic of Nicaragua to the Republic of Costa Rica”

PDF (Spanish) EPUB (Spanish)
  • María Elisa Zavala Achurra
María Elisa Zavala Achurra
Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile.

Published 2021-09-06

Keywords

  • International court,
  • Reparation,
  • Punitive damages

Copyright (c) 2021 María Elisa Zavala Achurra

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Zavala Achurra, M. E. (2021). Compensation and punitive rights in International Law: Commentary on the Judgment of the International Court of Justice on “Compensation Owed by the Republic of Nicaragua to the Republic of Costa Rica”. Revista De Derecho (Coquimbo. En línea), 28, e3336. https://doi.org/10.22199/issn.0718-9753-2021-0018

Abstract

The recent compensation ruling issued by the International Court of Justice in the case disputed between Costa Rica and Nicaragua raises relevant points about reparations in the international sphere. It is established in doctrine and in jurisprudence that compensation granted in international law seeks to repair a damage caused, but never punish the offending state. However, it is necessary to analyze if in this case that paradigm begins to change. Specifically, the way majority judges reasoned, and some Statements and a Separate Opinion to the ruling, show that in this case de facto punitive damages were probably awarded. Even if that were not the case, voices arise within the International Court of Justice itself that call for the inclusion of punitive damages in this legal system. In this context, the study of the conception, role and function of compensation in international law is of the outmost relevance. This commentary warns of the challenges that would exist if international tribunals award punitive damages.

PDF (Spanish) EPUB (Spanish)

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. van Aaken, A. y Motoc, I. (Eds.). (2018). The European Convention on Human Rights and general international law. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198830009.001.0001
  2. Alessandri Rodríguez, A. (1943). De la responsabilidad extracontractual en el derecho civil chileno (título 35 del libro IV del Código civil). Santiago: Universitaria.
  3. Allen, M. P. (2004). The Supreme court, punitive damages and state sovereignty. George Mason Law review, 13(1), 1-68. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3xTUov6
  4. American Law Institute. (1979). Restatement of the Law second, Torts (Vol. 4). Saint Paul, MN, A.L.I.
  5. Bhandari, D. (2018). Separate opinion of Judge Bhandari. Certain activities carried out by Nicaragua in the border area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua). Compensation owed by the Republic of Nicaragua to the Republic of Costa Rica. Judgment of 2 february 2018. Reports of judgments, advisory opinions and orders (International Court of Justice), (1133), 96-104. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3jM6wdN
  6. Barros Bourie, E. (2006). Tratado de responsabilidad extracontractual. Santiago: Jurídica de Chile.
  7. Cabrillac, R. (2010). Droit des obligations (9a ed.). Paris: Dalloz.
  8. Charney, J. I. (1998). Is international law threatened by multiple international tribunals? (Vol. 271, Recucil des cours). Boston, MA: Martinus Nijhoff. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1875-8096_pplrdc_A9789041112101_03
  9. Colby, T. B. (2003). Beyond the multiple punishment problem: punitive damages as punishment for individual, private wrongs. Minnesota law review, 87(3), 583-678. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3k13npq
  10. Convención Americana sobre Derechos Humanos (Pacto de San José). Organización de los Estados Americanos, San José, Costa Rica, 18 de julio de 1978. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3ogz53i
  11. Corral Talciani, H. (2003). Lecciones de responsabilidad civil extracontractual. Santiago: Jurídica de Chile.
  12. Crawford, J. (2013). State responsibility: the general part. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139033060
  13. Donoghue, J. E. (2018). Separate opinion of Judge Donoghue. Certain activities carried out by Nicaragua in the border area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua). Compensation owed by the Republic of Nicaragua to the Republic of Costa Rica. Judgment of 2 february 2018. Reports of judgments, advisory opinions and orders (International Court of Justice), (1133), 85-95. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3yO6SVq
  14. Draft articles on state responsibility with commentaries thereto adopted by the international law commission on first reading, 97-02583 (International Law Commission Enero de 1997). Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3BJmNX5
  15. The Factory at Chorzow (Claim for Indemnity) (The Merits). Germany v. Poland, File E. c. XIII Docket XIV: I (Permanent Court of International Justice, 13 de septiembre de 1928). Recuperado de https://bit.ly/2VgKoyM
  16. García-Matamoros, L. V. y Arévalo-Ramírez, W. (2019). Desarrollos recientes sobre daños punitivos en el derecho continental, en el common law, en el Sistema Interamericano de Derechos Humanos y en el derecho internacional. Revista de derecho privado, 37(183), 183-220. https://doi.org/10.18601/01234366.n37.08
  17. Garrido y Baigorria Vs. Argentina (Reparaciones y Costas), Serie C, N° 91 (Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos 27 de agosto de 1998). Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3841bbi
  18. Gevorgian, K. (2018). Declaration of Judge Gevorgian. Certain activities carried out by Nicaragua in the border area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua). Compensation owed by the Republic of Nicaragua to the Republic of Costa Rica. Judgment of 2 february 2018. Reports of judgments, advisory opinions and orders (International Court of Justice), (1133), 105-108. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3h3C25a
  19. Godínez Cruz Vs. Honduras (Reparaciones y Costas), Serie C No. 8 (Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos 21 de julio de 1989). Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3mqiTOq
  20. Gotanda, J. Y. (2007). Damages in private international law (Vol. 326, Recucil des cours). Boston, MA: Martinus Nijhoff. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1875-8096_pplrdc_A9789004166165_02
  21. Gotanda, J. Y. (2009). The unpredictability paradox: punitive damages and interest in international arbitration. The Journal of World Investment & Trade, 10(4), 553-572. https://doi.org/10.1163/221190009X00303
  22. Hernán Gutiérrez San Martín con Municipalidad de Viña del Mar, Rol N° 2811-2018 (Corte Suprema 28 de marzo de 2018). Recuperado de https://westlawchile.cl id: CL/JUR/1506/2018
  23. Huang, B. I. (2014). Surprisingly punitive damages. Virginia law review, 100(5), 1027-1060. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3BL34qc
  24. International Court of Justice. (2009). Dispute regarding navigational and related rights (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua). Judgment of 13 july 2009. Reports of judgments, advisory opinions and orders (International Court of Justice), (959), 213-272. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3BNqrPB
  25. International Court of Justice. (2011). Certain activities carried out by Nicaragua in the border area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua). Request for the indication of provisional measures. Order of 8 march 2011. Reports of Judgments, advisory opinions and orders (International Court of Justice), (1013), 6-28. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/38G1Bos
  26. International Court of Justice. (2013). Certain activities carried out by Nicaragua in the border area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua). Joinder of proceedings. Order of 17 april 2013. Reports of Judgments, advisory opinions and orders (International Court of Justice), (1043), 166-171. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/38L4R1K
  27. International Court of Justice. (2013b). Certain activities carried out by Nicaragua in the border area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua). Construction of a road in Costa Rica along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v. Costa Rica). Request presented by Costa Rica for the indication of new provisional measures. Order of 22 november 2013. Reports of Judgments, advisory opinions and orders (International Court of Justice), (1051), 354-370. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3yXX2AN
  28. International Court of Justice. (2015). Certain activities carried out by Nicaragua in the border area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua) and construction of a road in Costa Rica along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v. Costa Rica). Judgment of 16 december 2015. Reports of judgments, advisory opinions and orders (International Court of Justice), (1088), 665-741. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/38Frc0S
  29. International Court of Justice. (2018). Certain activities carried out by Nicaragua in the border area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua). Compensation owed by the Republic of Nicaragua to the Republic of Costa Rica. Judgment of 2 february 2018. Reports of judgments, advisory opinions and orders (International Court of Justice), (1133). Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3yN6h6s
  30. Jorgensen, N. (1997). A reappraisal of punitive damages in international law. British yearbook of international law, 68(1), 247–266. https://doi.org/10.1093/bybil/68.1.247
  31. Kingsbury, B. (1999). Is the proliferation of international courts and tribunals a systemic problem? New York University Journal of international law & politics, 31(4), 679-696. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3jXp6i2
  32. Landes, W. M. y Posner, R. A. (1987). The economic structure of tort law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  33. Levit, V. B. (1974). Punitive damages today. Insurance law journal, 1974(9), 483-487.
  34. Lowe, V. (2000). Overlapping jurisdiction in international tribunals. The Australian year book of international law online, 20(1), 191-204. https://doi.org/10.1163/26660229-020-01-900000012
  35. Nielsen, Fred K. (1925, Noviembre 16). Laura M. B. Janes et al. (U.S.A.) v. United Mexican States. Reports of international arbitral awards, 4, 82-98. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3D1mM2f
  36. Oppenheim, L. (1928). International law (vol. 1). Londres: Longmans.
  37. Orrego Vicuña, F. (1992, Febrero 11). Dispute concerning responsibility for the deaths of Letelier and Moffitt (United States, Chile). Reports of international arbitral awards, 25, 3-19. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3D1iXtM
  38. Petsche, M. (2013). Punitive damages in international commercial arbitration: a conflict of laws lesson. Journal of international arbitration, 30(1), 31-48. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3ge2t82
  39. Polinsky, M. y Shavell, S. (1998). Punitive damages and economic analysis. Harvard law review, 111(4), 868-962. https://doi.org/10.2307/1342009
  40. Polinsky, M. y Shavell, S. (2000). Punitive damages. En B. Bouckaert, and G. De Geest (Eds.), Encyclopedia of law and economics (Vol. 2, pp. 764-781). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/2W7BR1m
  41. Roginsky v. Richardson-Merrell, Inc., 378 F.2d 832 (United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit 4 de abril 1967). Recuperado de https://bit.ly/37XRMSt
  42. Sharkey, C. M. (2003). Punitive damages as societal damages. The Yale law journal, 113(2), 347-454. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3AXiKWX
  43. Shavell, S. (1987). Economic analysis of accident law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3xXglth
  44. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co. v. Campbell, 538 U.S. 408 (US Supreme Court 7 de Abril 2003). Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3h68jbZ
  45. Sunstein, C. R., Hastie, R., Payne, J. W., Schkade, D. A. y Viscusi, W. K. (2002). Punitive damages: how juries decide. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
  46. Sunstein, C., Kahneman, D. y Schkade, D. (1998). Assessing punitive damages (with notes on cognition and valuation in law). The Yale law journal, 107(7), 2071-2153. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/2XDKG3H
  47. Tams, C. (2002). Do Serious Breaches Give Rise to Any Specific Obligations of the Responsible State? European journal of international law, 13(5), 1161-1180. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3k8BknV
  48. Varnava and Others v. Turkey, Applications nos. 16064/90, 16065/90, 16066/90, 16068/90, 16069/90, 16070/90, 16071/90, 16072/90 and 16073/90 (European Court of Human Rights 18 de Septiembre de 2009). Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3ybfgOC
  49. Velásquez Rodríguez Vs. Honduras (Reparaciones y Costas), Serie C No. 7 (Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos 21 de julio de 1989). Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3k6J1ek
  50. Wittich, S. (2010). Punitive damages. En J. Crawford, A. Pellet, y S. Olleson (Eds.), The law of international responsibility (pp. 667-675). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  51. Yarn, D. H. (Ed.). (1999). Dictionary of conflict resolution. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Recuperado de https://bit.ly/3h55PL5