ABSTRACT
One of the most striking elements of the scholarly writings about the settlement of international disputes published in the early twentieth century is the radical nature of some of the solutions proposed. When the Council of the League of Nations set out to create the Court, it appointed an Advisory Committee of Jurists ‘for the purpose of preparing plans for the establishment’ thereof. Because the Court is just one method of dispute settlement among many, the existence of proceedings before the Court does not preclude the concomitant use of a number of different methods in relation to the same dispute. Many commentators would argue that reducing the Court’s function to dispute settlement discounts the profound impact of the Court’s jurisprudence on the system of international law. It is crucial, however, that the Court itself views the elucidation of rules of international law as ancillary to its main function of solving disputes.
