INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE YEAR 2012 2012 3 February General List No. Peace Treaty of 1947 ⎯ Federal Compensation Law of 1953 ⎯ 1961 Agreements ⎯ 238 of 22 October 2014 , the Italian Constitutional Court (the CC) produced the most spectacular display of dualism this side of Medellin . It is shown that, although the outcome of the dispute was not unexpected, the Court rendered a very conservative and State-centric judgment which does not take into consideration the interests of individuals. III. ObiterJ, 'International Court of Justice: Germany v Italy (Greece Intervening)', Watching the Law Blog, 20 February 2012. In the first part of the paper, the preceding Italian national case law on the denial of State Immunity is analysed – from the notorious Ferrini decision of the Italian Court of Cassation to the final decision in the Milde case, as a result of which Germany brought the dispute before the Hague Court. The applica-tion, filed by Germany in December 2008, requested that the Court deliberate the dispute concerning the respect of Ger- B. Wittes, 'Paul Stephan on ICJ Decision in Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy)', Lawfareblog, 5 February 2012. Germany's Oldest Yearbook of International Law. © 2011 German Yearbook of International Law. Furthermore, it does not give any effective solution to the issue of the contrast between jurisdictional immunity and human rights norms. STATUTE OF THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE Article 1 INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE estab-lished by the Charter of the United Nations as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations shall be constituted and shall function in accord-ance with the provisions of the present Statute. Finally, the paper shows the main difficulties which the implementation of the Court’s judgment may involve for the Italian legal order. of the State (Germany v. Italy) rendered on 3 February 20121 was therefore eagerly awaited by commentators and political actors alike. Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece Intervening) was a case concerning the extent of state immunity before the International Court of Justice.The case was brought by Germany after various decisions by Italian courts to ignore the state immunity of Germany when confronted with claims against Germany by victims of Nazi-era war crimes. Germany v. Italy before the International Court of Justice In the face of this situation, Germany brought the matter before the International Court of Justice (ICJ). All rights reserved. Jurisdictional Immunities of the State: Germany v. Italy before the ICJ from an Italian Perspective Marco Calisto Abstract. I. Wuerth, 'ICJ Issues Jurisdictional Immunities Judgment', Opinio Juris, 7 February 2012. Unusually though, both par-1 ICJ, Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece inter- Earlier this month, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) delivered its decision for Germany v. Italy. Founded in 1948. In the second part of the paper the ICJ’s approach to the issue of State immunity and the arguments raised by the Italian defence are explored. This paper focuses on the contrast between the rule on State immunity and human rights norms, and on the ICJ judgment on Jurisdictional Immunity (Germany v. Italy) from an Italian point of view. This paper focuses on the contrast between the rule on State immunity and human rights norms, and on the ICJ judgment on Jurisdictional Immunity (Germany v. Italy… Not surprisingly the court’s ruling in favour of Germany was wel-comed by some and criticized by others. The CC declared the unconstitutionality of Italy’s compliance with the International Court of Justice (ICJ)’s judgment Germany v. 1 In its 2012 judgment on Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v Italy, Greece Intervening), the International Court of Justice (ICJ) determined the scope and extent of States’ entitlement to jurisdictional immunity in civil proceedings before foreign courts involving claims based on serious violations of humanitarian law under customary international law.