other_document

Title
Other documents

Further reply of Niger to the question put to the Parties by Judge Bennouna at the end of the public sitting held on 12 October 2012 at 3 p.m. (translation)

Further reply to the question of Judge Bennouna

Replying orally to the question put by Judge Bennouna, counsel for Niger stated the
following at the hearing on the afternoon of 17 October 1:

“This may be an appropriate time to reply to Judge Bennouna’s question [slide
of the sketch-map showing the line of the frontier]. For the record, that question reads
as follows: ‘To what extent and for which section(s) do each of the Parties agree to

Response of Uruguay to the question put to it by Judge Bennouna at the end of the hearing held on 29 September 2009

~-----------------------------~----------------------------------~-----------------~-------------~--~--------- -------------------------------

Uruguay's Respouse to Judge Beuuouna's Question

La question de juge Bennouna :

Quel procédéet quel produit sont utilizés par l'usine Botnia pour son nettoyage ?

Judge Bennouna's question:

Comments in writing of the Republic of Honduras on the written reply by the Nicaraguan Government to the question put by Judge ad hoc Gaja at the public sitting held on 16 March 2007

EMBASSY OF HONDURAS TO THE KINGDOM
OF THE NETHERLANDS

16 April 2007

Sir,

With reference to the case conceming Maritime Delimitation between Nicaragua and
Honduras in the Caribbean Sea iliicaragua v. Honduras), I have the honour to acknowledge
receiptof your letter dated 5 April 2007 with reference 130104, addressed to H.E. Mr. Max
Velasquez Diaz and H.E. Roberto Flores Bermudez, Agents of the Republic of Honduras,

Written reply of the Republic of Nicaragua to the question put by Judge Simma at the public sitting held on 20 March 2007

ANSWER TO THE QUESTION PUT BY JUDGE SIMMA TO NICARAGUA

Question put by judge Simma

"In yesterday's hearings in the reply to the question posed by Judge Keith, on the

hypothesis underlying this question, Nicaragua presented a sketch-map which showed
the cays claimed by Honduras lying to the south of the bisector line argued by
Nicaragua as enclaves having 3-mile territorial seas. I refer to sketch-maps CAG 2-10
and AP 2-4 and to the pleading ofProfessor Pellet in paragraph 30.

Written response of the Russian Federation to the questions put by Judges Koroma, Abraham and Cançado Trindade at the end of the public sitting held on Friday 17 September 2010

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

APPLICATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE

ELllvllNATION OF ALL FORMS OF RACIALDISCRIMINATION

(GEORGIA vRUSSIANFEDERATION)

REPLIES OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION TO THE

QUESTIONS PUTTO THE PARTIES DURING THE ORAL

HEARING BYJUDGES KOROMA,ABRAHAM

AND CANÇADO TRINDADE

A. QUESTION PUT BYJUDGE KOROMA

"What precisely, in the view of the Parties, is the object and purpose of

Comments in writing of the Republic of Nicaragua on the Honduran Government's written reply to the question put by Judge ad hoc Gaja at the public sitting held on 16 March 2007

EMRASSYOF NICARAGUA
THE HAGUE

14April2007

Sir,

I have the honouto referto yourletterdated29 March 2007 in relationtothe
case concerning mrjtime Delimitationktween Nicara~ua and I-Ionduras in the
CnribIx~n_Y_(eN>icaragua,.Monduca!), by whichyou inform me that thcI'rcsidenthas
fixcclMonday 16 April, as timc-limit for transmittinNicaragua's observationson

Written reply of Greece to the question put by Judge Bennouna at the public sitting held on 30 March 2011

HELLENIC REPUBLIC

MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

Application oftlze Interim Accord of 13 September 1995 (former Yugoslav Republic of

Macedonia v Greece)

Question of Judge Bennouna

Reply of Greece

1. On 30 March 2011, Judge Bennouna addressed the following question to Greece:

Subscribe to other_document
Links