Norma relacionada
Yugoslavia, Federal Republic of
Practice Relating to Rule 70. Weapons of a Nature to Cause Superfluous Injury or Unnecessary Suffering
In the Legality of Use of Force cases in 1999, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia initiated proceedings before the ICJ against ten NATO member States (Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, United Kingdom and United States) on the ground, inter alia, that “by taking part in the use of cluster bombs, [the respective States had] acted against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in breach of [their] obligation not to use prohibited weapons, i.e. weapons calculated to cause unnecessary sufferings”. 
Yugoslavia, Federal Republic of, Applications instituting proceedings submitted to the ICJ, Legality of Use of Force cases (Yugoslavia v. Belgium; Yugoslavia v. Canada; Yugoslavia v. France; Yugoslavia v. Germany; Yugoslavia v. Italy; Yugoslavia v. Netherlands; Yugoslavia v. Portugal; Yugoslavia v. Spain; Yugoslavia v. United Kingdom; Yugoslavia v. United States of America), 29 April 1999.
After the ICJ had found in 1999 that it manifestly lacked jurisdiction in the cases against Spain and the United States and had ordered the removal of these cases from the ICJ’s general list, 
ICJ, Legality of Use of Force cases (Yugoslavia v. Spain; Yugoslavia v. United States of America), Provisional Measures, Orders, 2 June 1999, ICJ Reports 1999, pp. 761 and 916.
it further found, in its 2004 Judgments on the Preliminary Objections, that it lacked jurisdiction also with regard to the remaining eight cases. 
ICJ, Legality of Use of Force cases (Serbia and Montenegro v. Belgium; Serbia and Montenegro v. Canada; Serbia and Montenegro v. France; Serbia and Montenegro v. Germany; Serbia and Montenegro v. Italy; Serbia and Montenegro v. Netherlands; Serbia and Montenegro v. Portugal; Serbia and Montenegro v. United Kingdom), Preliminary Objections, Judgments, 15 December 2004, ICJ Reports 2004, pp. 279, 429, 575, 720, 865, 1011, 1160 and 1307.