(63)‘Nicaragua presented and argument where by it would be apparently be dispensed from producing evidence of the existence of the legal interest on which it relies, by reason of the assertion of the parties, this argument is named ‘equitable estoppel’ or ‘recognition’ [Honduras & Salvador had said that Nicaragua had legal i‘s]’ 1990
‘So far Nicaragua relies on estoppel, the Chamber will only say that it sees no evidence of some essential elements required by estoppel: a statement or representation made by one party to another and reliance upon it by that other party to his detriment of or to the advantage of the party making it’
1992 the Court said: The uti possidetis principle is not absolute. In a later date changes in boundaries can take place either for adjudication or boundary treaty. The question then arises whether UP can be qualified by acquiescence or recognition. There is not reason why this factor should not operate.