The procedure for intervention before the International Court of Justice has been little explored in literature, which may be explained by the uncertainties that inhabit it.
In fact, this is the reason why States have had little recourse to it – and worse yet – only a few applications for intervention have been successful. The present article seeks to throw light on the most problematic aspects of third State intervention, with a view to finding the thread which will guide a way out of the labyrinth of uncertainty.
The full list is provided in Chinkin, supra note 3, at 1178, 1181–1182. In addition, recently the Court granted New Zealand’s declaration of intervention under Article 63 in the Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v. Japan) case. (See Order of 6 February 2013).