Clarifying the Unclear: Requests for Modification, Revocation, and New Provisional Measures

Abstract More and more frequently, parties are submitting multiple requests for provisional measures within the same proceedings. These include requests for the modification or revocation of existing provisional measures, or for the granting of new provisional measures. However, the practical application of these procedures is problematic. It remains unclear whether a modification may also serve to “clarify” or “specify” existing provisional measures. There is ongoing debate as to whether non-compliance with the previous measures may be taken into account when considering modification. Some requests for modification have been wrongly submitted and examined as if they were requests for new measures. Certain judges argue that international courts should adopt a more flexible approach to these conditions, at times even bypassing them. For the sake of their legitimacy and prestige, international courts are urged to begin stabilising their jurisprudence.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals
Published
2025-10-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1163/15718034-bja10140
Primary Topic
International Law and Human Rights
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Clarifying the Unclear: Requests for Modification, Revocation, and New Provisional Measures

Miłosz Gapsa
The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals
International Law and Human Rights
article

Clarifying the Unclear: Requests for Modification, Revocation, and New Provisional Measures

Miłosz Gapsa
article en

Abstract

Abstract More and more frequently, parties are submitting multiple requests for provisional measures within the same proceedings. These include requests for the modification or revocation of existing provisional measures, or for the granting of new provisional measures. However, the practical application of these procedures is problematic. It remains unclear whether a modification may also serve to “clarify” or “specify” existing provisional measures. There is ongoing debate as to whether non-compliance with the previous measures may be taken into account when considering modification. Some requests for modification have been wrongly submitted and examined as if they were requests for new measures. Certain judges argue that international courts should adopt a more flexible approach to these conditions, at times even bypassing them. For the sake of their legitimacy and prestige, international courts are urged to begin stabilising their jurisprudence.

The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals
Uniwersytet SWPS (PL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 66%
International Law and Human Rights
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.