Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

General Conclusion to Part II

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this chapter

+ Tax (if applicable)

Chapter Summary

The arguments referred to by writers supporting the doctrine of non-succession are generally unconvincing. As a matter of illustration, the argument that a State is not responsible for acts committed by other States is undoubtedly valid in itself. Thus, no objection can be raised to the proposition that the responsibility for an internationally wrongful act committed before the date of succession remains with the perpetrator (the predecessor State, which sometimes becomes the "continuing" State). Modern writers have increasingly recognised the inherent flaws and the incoherent arguments on which is based the theory supporting the strict and automatic "rule" of non-succession. State practice shows that in the context of unification and integration of States, the principle of succession to international responsibility finds application.

Keywords: continuing State; internationally wrongful act; predecessor State; State practice



Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
    State Succession to International Responsibility — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation