ABSTRACT
Obligations of result and obligations of conduct have a longstanding history in private law. The obligation of result is simply the obligation of the debtor to attain a predetermined result. The private law distinction between obligations of result and obligations of means can only be described as a success. The distinction between the types of obligations was first initiated in public international law in the context of the Draft Articles on State Responsibility (DASR) by then Special Rapporteur of the International Law Commission (ILC) Roberto Ago in the late 1970s. In contrast to the obligation of result, the international obligation of conduct compels a state to follow a specific course of action and adopt and implement defined measures. The debate on how to make the right to housing an obligation of result should be subordinate to the question whether measures are effective and result-oriented, whatever their actual qualification might be.
