2.6 while it certainly follows that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to recommend conservatory measures, it hardly follows, as obviously, that such jurisdiction should be exclusive and prohibit any recourse to national courts, traditionally and virtually universally recognised as having sole jurisdiction to order such measure.
2.7 By deciding to have recourse to the remedies available to it under the law to protect its debt, a party is but exercising a right which is recognised by law. But the exercise of such a right may be considered abusive.
2.8 In order to determine whether a seizure was carried out in a brash and abusive manner, one must consider the time when the measure was solicited. It is at that date that it must be appreciated whether the principle upon which the creditor relief is certain, or whether the plaintiff requested the seizure knowing that he did not, in fact, have any right.