Arbitral Award of 3 October 1899 (Guyana v. Venezuela)

1 International Court of Justice — Jurisdiction — Dispute concerning validity of arbitral award of 3 October 1899 — Dispute referred to International Court of Justice by United Nations Secretary-General — Dispute referred to the Court under Geneva Agreement, 1966 — Interpretation of Geneva Agreement — Meaning of “controversy” under Geneva Agreement — Whether Parties consenting to the Court’s jurisdiction under Geneva Agreement — Whether Secretary-General’s decision binding on Parties — Whether Secretary-General bound to choose means of dispute settlement following sequence in Article 33 UN Charter, 1945 — Whether consent to the Court’s jurisdiction subject to conditions — Whether Parties having accepted possibility that Secretary-General could choose the Court as means of dispute settlement — Whether Secretary-General’s decision in conformity with Geneva Agreement — Seisin — Whether Guyana able to file proceedings with the Court unilaterally — Scope of jurisdiction — Jurisdiction ratione materiae — Whether jurisdiction extending to determination of land boundary — Jurisdiction ratione temporis — Whether jurisdiction extending to conduct subsequent to conclusion of Geneva Agreement International Court of Justice — Admissibility — Distinction between admissibility and jurisdiction — Distinction between existence and exercise of jurisdiction — Whether Venezuela’s objection concerning existence or exercise of jurisdiction — Res judicata — Whether judgment of 18 December 2020 already covering matters raised in Venezuela’s objection — Timeliness of Venezuela’s objection — Whether Venezuela having to raise objection by deadline to file pleadings concerning existence of jurisdiction — Whether United Kingdom indispensable third party — Interpretation of Geneva Agreement, 1966 — Whether United Kingdom consenting to the Court’s jurisdiction by signing up to Geneva Agreement — Whether Geneva Agreement reflecting understanding that dispute settlement without United Kingdom involvement — Whether United Kingdom aware of scope of dispute — Whether subsequent practice confirming interpretation of Geneva Agreement — Whether indispensable third party principle applicable International Court of Justice — Provisional measures — Plausibility of rights claimed — Guyana’s rights based on arbitral award of 3 October 1899 — Whether measures requested linked to plausible rights — Real and imminent risk of irreparable 2 prejudice — Whether Venezuela’s referendum likely to lead to annexation of disputed territory — Whether referendum’s scheduled date showing urgency — Whether provisional measures to be indicated — Power to indicate measures different from those requested — Measures for non-aggravation and non-extension of dispute