Comprehension
The Principles of state responsibility dictate that states are accountable for breaches of International Law. Such breaches of treaty or customary international law enable the injured state to maintain a claim against the violating state, whether by way of diplomatic action or by way of recourse to international mechanisms where such are in place with regard to subject matter in issue. Recourse to International Arbitration or to the International Court of Justice is also possible provided the necessary jurisdictional basis has been established. Customary International Law imposes several important fundamental obligations upon the States in the area of environmental protection. The view that the International law supports an approach predicated upon absolute territorial sovereignty, so that a state could do as it liked irrespective of the consequences upon other states has long been discredited. The basic duty upon states is not so to act as to injure the rights of other states. This duty has evolved partly out of the regime concerned with international waterways. In the [1] case, the Permanent Court of International Justice noted that 'this community of interest in a navigable river becomes the basis of common legal right, the essential features of which are the perfect equality of all riparian states in the use of the whole course of the river and the exclusion of any preferential privileges of any riparian state in relation to others.'. But the principle is of far wide application. It was held in [2] case that the concept of territorial sovereignty incorporated an obligation to protect within the territory the rights of other states. It has now been established that it was an obligation of every state to not to allow knowingly its territory to be used for acts contrary to the rights of other states. This judicial approach has now been widely reaffirmed in international instruments. Article [3] of the Law of Sea Convention, 1982 provides that 'states shall take all measures necessary to ensure that activities under their jurisdiction and control are so conducted as not to cause damage by pollution to other states and their environment.' It is sometimes argued that the appropriate standard for the conduct of states in this field is that of strict liability. In other words, states are under an absolute obligation to prevent pollution and are thus liable for its effects irrespective of fault.
Question: 1
In relation to State responsibility, the Permanent Court of International Justice has observed that: ‘ It is a principle of international law and even a greater conception of law, that any breach of an engagement involves an obligation to make reparation’, in which of the following case?
In relation to State responsibility, the Permanent Court of International Justice has observed that: ‘ It is a principle of international law and even a greater conception of law, that any breach of an engagement involves an obligation to make reparation’, in which of the following case?
Updated On: Jul 11, 2024
- Chorzow Factory Case.
- Home Missionary Society Case
- Corfu Channel Case
- Genocide Convention Case
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
The Correct Option is (A):Chorzow Factory Case.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 2
The name of which one of the following cases has been replaced by '[1]‘ in the above paragraph?
The name of which one of the following cases has been replaced by '[1]‘ in the above paragraph?
Updated On: Aug 23, 2024
- Corfu Channel Case
- Trial Smelter Arbitration
- International Commission on the River Oder Case
- Case Concerning auditing of accounts between Netherlands and France.
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is C
Solution and Explanation
The Correct Option is (C):International Commission on the River Oder Case
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 3
The name of which of the following cases has been replaced by '[2]‘ in the above paragraph?
The name of which of the following cases has been replaced by '[2]‘ in the above paragraph?
Updated On: Aug 23, 2024
- Island of Palmas Case
- Nuclear Tests Case
- Corfu Channel Case
- None of the above.
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
The Correct Option is (A): Island of Palmas Case
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 4
Which Article has been replaced by '[3]‘ in the above paragraph?
Which Article has been replaced by '[3]‘ in the above paragraph?
Updated On: Jul 11, 2024
- 191
- 192
- 193
- 194
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is D
Solution and Explanation
The Correct Option is (D):194
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 5
In which of the following cases, the International Court of Justice pointed out that when in regard to any matter of practice, two states follow it repeatedly for a long time, it becomes a binding customary rule?
In which of the following cases, the International Court of Justice pointed out that when in regard to any matter of practice, two states follow it repeatedly for a long time, it becomes a binding customary rule?
Updated On: Jul 11, 2024
- South West Africa Case
- South West Africa Case
- Right of Passage over Indian Territory Case
- North Sea Continental Shelf Case
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is C
Solution and Explanation
The Correct Option is (C):Kyoto Protocol, 1997
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 6
Doctrine of 'Sic utere tuo ut alienum non leadas' is contained in which of thefollowing?
Doctrine of 'Sic utere tuo ut alienum non leadas' is contained in which of thefollowing?
Updated On: Jul 11, 2024
- Basel Convention, 1989
- Principle 21 of Rio Declaration
- Kyoto Protocol, 1997
- Principles 21 and 22 of Stockholm Declaration
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is D
Solution and Explanation
The Correct Option is (D):Principles 21 and 22 of Stockholm Declaration
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 7
Advisory Opinion can be given by the International Court of Justice on Legal question:
Advisory Opinion can be given by the International Court of Justice on Legal question:
Updated On: Jul 11, 2024
- On the request of Security Council Only
- On the request of General Assembly only
- On the request of General Assembly or Security Council or both.
- On the request of Economic and Social Council if authorised by the Security Council.
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is C
Solution and Explanation
The Correct Option is (C):On the request of General Assembly or Security Council or both.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 8
In International Law, a good example of the application of principle of Sovereignty is the 'theory of auto-limitation'. This theory was given by which of the following schools of thought?
In International Law, a good example of the application of principle of Sovereignty is the 'theory of auto-limitation'. This theory was given by which of the following schools of thought?
Updated On: Aug 22, 2024
- Positivist
- Historical
- Sociological
- Naturalist
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
The Correct Option is (A):Positivist
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 9
Which of the following instruments refer to the 'Polluter Pays' Principle for fixing the liability in environmental cases?
Which of the following instruments refer to the 'Polluter Pays' Principle for fixing the liability in environmental cases?
Updated On: Jul 11, 2024
- Principle 16 of Rio Declaration
- International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Cooperation, 1990
- Convention on Transboundary Effects of Industrial Accidents 1992.
- All of the above.
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is D
Solution and Explanation
The Correct Option is (D):All of the above.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 10
International Court of Justice is different from the Supreme Court of India because:
International Court of Justice is different from the Supreme Court of India because:
Updated On: Aug 23, 2024
- It is an International Court having jurisdiction on all countries.
- It is an International Court having jurisdiction on all countries.
- Its judgements have no binding force.
- Its jurisdiction is limited to States which have consented to its jurisdiction and its judgements are binding only on the parties to the dispute.
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is D
Solution and Explanation
The Correct Option is (D):Its jurisdiction is limited to States which have consented to its jurisdiction and its judgements are binding only on the parties to the dispute.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Top Questions on Public International Law
- Match the followingSelect the correct option:
I. Uti Possidetis 1. Principle in customary international law providing that where there has been a fundamental change of circumstances since an agreement was concluded, a party to that agreement may withdraw from or terminate it. II. Pacta Sunt Servanda 2. Two or more states equally exercise sovereignty with respect to a territory and its inhabitants. III. Condominium 3. Doctrine that territory remains with the possessor state at the end of war or occupation unless otherwise determined by a treaty or an agreement. IV. Rebus Sic Stantibus 4. Proposition that treaties are binding upon the parties to them and must be performed in good faith. - AILET LLM - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Public International Law
- A key pillar of International Refugee law is that “No Contracting State shall expel or return [...] a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.” This is also referred to as:
- AILET LLM - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Public International Law
- Consider the following statements with respect to Geographical Indication protection
(i) The WTO TRIPs Agreement identifies Geographical Indications as Intellectual Property
(ii) Lucknow Chikankari and Bikaneri Bhujia are recognised Gs in India
(iii) The G registration can be obtained in respect of goods and services
(iv) The G registration is valid for a period of 15 years only and is non-renewableWhich of the statements given above is/are incorrect?- AILET LLM - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Public International Law
- A fundamentality principle of international humanitarian law is the principle of proportionality. Which of the following statement most appropriately describes the principle?
- AILET LLM - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Public International Law
- Which of the following is not a core international human rights treaty?
- AILET LLM - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Public International Law
View More Questions
Questions Asked in CLAT PG exam
- The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘Nil Ratan Kundu and another v. Abhijit Kundu’ 2008(3) Apex Court Judgements 232 (SC), while granting the custody to the maternal grandparents observed: In our judgement, the law relating to custody of a child is fairly well settled and it is this. In deciding a difficult and complex question as to custody of minor, a Court of law should keep in mind relevant statutes and the rights flowing therefrom. But such cases cannot be decided solely by interpreting legal provisions. It is a humane problem in live in relationship and is required to be solved with human touch. A Court while dealing with custody cases, is neither bound by statutes nor by strict rules of evidence or procedure nor by precedents. In selecting proper guardian of a minor, the paramount consideration should be the welfare and well-being of the child. In selecting a guardian, the Court is exercising parens patriae jurisdiction and is expected, may bound, to give due weight to a child’s ordinary comfort, contentment, health, education, intellectual development and favorable surroundings. But over and above physical comforts, moral and ethical values cannot be ignored. They are equally, or we may say, even more important, essential and indispensable consideration. If the minor is old enough to form an intelligent preference or judgement, the Court must consider such preference as well, though the final decision should rest with the Court as to what is conducive to the welfare of the minor.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘Gaurav Nagpal v. Semedha Nagpal’-(2009)1 SCC 42, while giving paramount importance to the welfare of the child, which should include moral and ethical values, besides ethical well-being, observed as under:
When the court is confronted with conflicting demands made by the parents, each time it has to justify the demands. The Court has not only to look at the issue on legalistic basis, in such matters human angles are relevant for deciding those issues. The Court then does not give emphasis on what the parties say, it has to exercise a jurisdiction which is aimed at the welfare of the minor. As observed recently in Mausami Moitra Ganguli case, the Court has to give due weightage to the child’s ordinary contentment, health, education, intellectual development and favorable surroundings, but over and above physical comforts, the moral and ethical values have also to be noted. They are equal if not more important than the others.
(Extracts from Jaswinder Singh and Another vs Surjit Singh, AIR 2010 (NOC) 425 (P. & H.))- CLAT PG - 2025
- Family Laws
- The Companies Act, 2013 does not deal with insolvency and bankruptcy when the companies are unable to pay their debts or the aspects relating to the revival and rehabilitation of the companies and their winding up if revival and rehabilitation is not possible. In principle, it cannot be doubted that the cases of revival or winding up of the company on the ground of insolvency and inability to pay debts are different from cases where companies are wound up under Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013. The two situations are not identical. Under Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013, even a running and financially sound company can also be wound up for the reasons in clauses (a) to (e). The reasons and grounds for winding up under Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013 are vastly different from the reasons and grounds for the revival and rehabilitation scheme as envisaged under the IBC. The two enactments deal with two distinct situations and in our opinion, they cannot be equated when we examine whether there is discrimination or violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. For the revival and rehabilitation of the companies, certain sacrifices are required from all quarters, including the workmen. In case of insolvent companies, for the sake of survival and regeneration, everyone, including the secured creditors and the Central and State Government, are required to make sacrifices. The workmen also have a stake and benefit from the revival of the company, and therefore unless it is found that the sacrifices envisaged for the workmen, which certainly form a separate class, are onerous and burdensome so as to be manifestly unjust and arbitrary, we will not set aside the legislation,solely on the ground that some or marginal sacrifice is to be made by the workers. We would also reject the argument that to find out whether there was a violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India or whether the right to life under Article 21 Constitution of India was infringed, we must word by word examine the waterfall mechanism envisaged under the Companies Act, 2013, where the company is wound up in terms of grounds (a) to (e) of Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013; and the rights of the workmen when the insolvent company is sought to be revived, rehabilitated or wound up under the Code. The grounds and situations in the context of the objective and purpose of the two enactments are entirely different.
(Extracted, with edits and revision, from the judgement in Moser Baer Karamchari Union Thr. President Mahesh Chand Sharma v. Union of India and Ors, 2023 SCC Online SC 547)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Company Law
- Ahmadi, J. (as he then was) speaking for himself and Punchhi, J., endorsed the recommendations in the following words-The time is ripe for taking stock of the working of the various Tribunals set up in the country after the insertion of Articles 323-A and 323-B in the Constitution. After the incorporation of these two articles, Acts have been enacted where-under tribunals have been constituted for dispensation of justice. Sufficient time has passed, and experience gained in these last few years for taking stock of the situation with a view to finding out if they have served the purpose and objectives for which they were constituted. Complaints have been heard in regard to the functioning of other tribunals as well and it is time that a body like the Law Commission of India has a comprehensive look-in with a view to suggesting measures for their improved functioning. That body can also suggest changes in the different statutes and evolve a model on the basis whereof tribunals may be constituted or reconstituted with a view to ensuring greater independence. An intensive and extensive study needs to be undertaken by the Law Commission in regard to the Constitution of tribunals under various statutes with a view to ensuring their independence so that the public confidence in such tribunals may increase and the quality of their performance may improve.
Before parting with the case, it is necessary to express our anguish over the ineffectiveness of the alternative mechanism devised for judicial review. The judicial review and remedy are the fundamental rights of the citizens. The dispensation of justice by the tribunal is much to be desired.
(Extracted with Edits from R.K. Jain v. Union of India, 1993 (4) SCC 119)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Constitutional Laws
- The elements of tort of negligence consist in – (a) duty of care; (b) duty is owed to the plaintiff; (c) the duty has been carelessly breached. Negligence does not entail liability unless the exacts a duty in the given circumstances to observe care. Duty is an obligation recognised by law to avoid conduct fraught with unreasonable risk of damage to others. The question whether duty exists in a particular situation involves determination of law. Hence, three ingredients are necessary for the existence of a duty of care: (i) foreseeability of the damage, (ii) proximity of relationship between the parties; and (iii) whether it is “just, fair and reasonable” that the law should impose a duty of care. In Caparo Industries Plc. v. Dickman, 1990 2AC 605, the court held that breach of duty is concerned with the standard of care that ought to have been adopted in the circumstances and whether the defendant’s conduct fell below that standard i.e., whether he was careless.
The court while quoting Rajkot Municipal Corporation v. Manjulben Jayantilal Nakum, 1997 stated that as a tort, negligence consists of legal duty to take care and breach of that duty. Duty determines whether the type of loss suffered by the plaintiff in the particular way in which to occurred can ever be actionable. The division of negligence into duty, breach and consequent damage is convenient for the purpose of exposition but it can be confusing because the issues will often overlap. The process of determining a breach of duty involves three steps: First, it is necessary to ascertain the qualities of the reasonable person, given the qualities attributed to him, would have taken in the circumstances. The factors that are permissible to take into account in this regard are prescribed by law, but the amount of care that the reasonable person would have taken is a question of fact. Thirdly, it must be determined whether the defendant took less care than the reasonable person would have taken.
(Extracts from Managing Director, Kerala Tourism Development Corporation Limited v. Deepti Singh and Ors., 2019 SC)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Law of Torts
- Article 14 of the Constitution stipulates that the State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of laws within the territory of India. Article 15(1) states that the State should not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them. Article 15(4) stipulates that nothing in Article 15 shall prevent the State from making any special provision for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes. Article 16 deals with equality of opportunity in matters of public employment. Clause (1) of Article 16 guarantees equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State. Clause (2) stipulates that no citizen shall be discriminated in or be ineligible for any employment or office under the State on the grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence or any of them. Clause (4) of the provision states that nothing in Article 16 shall prevent the State from making any provision for the reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any backward class of citizens, which in the opinion of the State, is not adequately represented in the services under the State. The purpose of the equal opportunity principle in Article 16(1) and the reservation provision in Article 16(4) has emerged as a focal point of the jurisprudence on reservations in this Court. A discussion of the journey of the competing models of equality that the Court has espoused and their evolution over the course of the years is necessary to understand the constitutional vision on equality.
The impugned constitutional amendments by which Article 16 (4-A) and 16 (4-B) have been inserted, flow from Article 16 (4). They do not alter the structure of Article 16 (4). They retain the controlling factors or the compelling reasons which enables the State to provide for reservation keeping in mind the overall efficiency of the state administration under article 335. Sub-categorization within a class is a constitutional requirement to secure substantive equality in the event that there is a distinction between two sections of a class; Sub-classification must not lead to the exclusion of one of the categories in the class. A model that provides sufficient opportunities to all categories of the class must be adopted; and Sub-classification among a class must be on a reasonable basis.
Justice Bela Trivedi opined, in dissent, that presidential list of scheduled castes notified under Article 341 cannot be altered by the States. Any change to this list can only be made by a law enacted by Parliament. Sub-classification, according to her would amount to tampering with the Presidential List and undermine the object Article 341, which aims to eliminate political influence in the SC-ST List. Further, she emphasised the importance of adhering to the rule of plain and literal interpretation. She mentions that any preferential treatment for a sub-class within the presidential list would deprive other classes within the same category of their benefits. In the absence of executive or legislative power, state lack the competence to sub-classify castes and the benefit reserved for all SCs. Allowing states to do so would constitute a colourable exercise of power, which is impermissible under law. Justice Trivedi concluded by affirming that affirmative action by States must remain within constitutional boundaries and held that the law laid down in E.V. Chinnaiah case was correct and should be upheld.
(Extract from The State of Punjab & Ors. v. Davinder Singh & Ors. 2024 SC)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Constitutional Laws
View More Questions