The Names and Scope of Treaties
- 1 July 1957
- journal article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in American Journal of International Law
- Vol. 51 (3) , 574-605
- https://doi.org/10.2307/2195064
Abstract
All writers commencing with Grotius say that the names of instruments embraced in the genus treaty have little, if any, legal significance. All who mention the matter say that some instruments are more important in international relations than others, and that “treaty” or “convention” is at the top of the list of some three dozen words that are used to describe such instruments. All agree that treaties generically have the characteristic of legally recording what the parties have agreed to, and, beyond that, all hedge on completing a definition. Few writers attempt to draw a line between treaties and legal obligations that are not treaties. In one way or another writers are accustomed to say that names are assigned to treaties idiosyncratically, at the whim of the draftsmen or by chance.Keywords
This publication has 2 references indexed in Scilit:
- The Nature and Scope of the Armistice AgreementAmerican Journal of International Law, 1956
- The Final Act of the London Conference on GermanyAmerican Journal of International Law, 1955