The Court connected the right to self-determination to non-self-governing territories and decolonization. While admitting that self-determination is a fundamental human right, there is little support for its application to situations of secession (eg Catalunya, Kosovo), albeit a safety valve is possible where people are grossly oppressed. All other situations concerning external self-determination should be resolved through constitutional processes. The Court found that the UK had failed to complete the decolonisation of the Mauritius.

A Swedish diplomat under the service of the UN was sent by the UN to Jerusalem, where he was assassinated. Although Israel had not yet become a State, the UNGA asked the ICJ whether it had the legal capacity to bring a claim against Israel for reparation. The practice at the time would have been for Sweden to bring the claim on behalf of its national (principle of diplomatic protection).

The ICJ effectively held that the international legal personality of international organizations was dependent on the functions assigned to them by their member States. This personality is independent from that of the member States and international organizations are able to bring claims for harm they have sustained. Moreover, the ICJ stipulated that the powers of organizations are more extensive than those prescribed in their founding treaties. It referred to implied powers which exist so that they can fulfil all the functions mandated in their founding treaties.