Application for revision & interpretation judgement 24-2-1982 continental shelf Tunisia/Libya

Tunisia asked the court three requests: 1. Revision of judgment, art 61 Statute, [found inadmissible] 2. Interpretation of judgment art 60 Statute. Libya contended that Tunisia was not looking for interpretation but a revision of the court judgement, and that Tunisia had failed to specify the differences on the implementation of the judgement [admissible] 3. Correction an error in the judgment, implied power [without object so it was not necessary to give a decision in the point]

In respect 2, the ICJ said an interpretation has two elements: a. purpose is to obtain and interpretation, its object is to obtain a clarification of the meaning and scope of what has been decided with binding force, and not to obtain an answer to questions not so decided b. there should exist a dispute as to the meaning or scope of the judgement (interpretation of Asylum) It is not required that the dispute should have manifested itself in a formal way, it should be sufficient if the two government have in fact shown themselves as holding opposite view in regard to the meaning or scope of a judgement