refon-ed to the definition of 'substantive law' and 'procedural lav/ as contained in Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Edition at page 1429. He drew attention to the fact that "the only platfmm on which to determine whether a statute will be interpreted to have retrospective effect is by detennining to which area of law it belongs - substantive or procedural." 10. He submitted that a close examination of the Sucolementarv.I Protoeol i • shows that it merely seeks to regulate the proceedings of this Court. There is '\ no place in the Protocol where any relief is provided for, nor't·--·does it regulate ........ any rights an_cl Qtilig:1tiQt1_S, It merely spells out steps to be followed in ---~------- -,---·--·.. actions before the Court. That those steps which belong to the area of procedural law must have retrospective effect. Consideratfon of arguments of parties. 11. Mr. Esangbedo argued that the Supplementary Protocol should have retrospective effect, as notl1ing prima facie is indicative of a converse construction. 12, It is undeniable that the principles of law as stated by both Counsel regarding retrospectivity of laws are correct. . These have been. applied in national courts for a long, long while. They have also been accepted in international comis and tribunals. 13. In the Ambatielos case decided by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on l st July 1952, see page 40 of the ICJ law rep01is of 1952, the principle of non-retrospective-effect of statutes was accepted. This principle had earlier been recognized by the Permanent Comi ofJnte;.national Justice (PCIJ) in the Mavromatis Palestine Concession case of August 1924, PCU Series A number 2, page 34, where it was stated that the Treaty of Lausanne 4 Downloaded from worldcourts.com. Use is subject to terms and conditions. See worldcourts.com/terms.htm