17. In the instant case, the primary ‘rules’ that place obligati0ns on Partner States would be found in the Treaty, while the ILC Articles would constitute supplementary rules that enable the Court determine whether the action or conduct in alleged contravention of a Treaty provision can be attributed to a Partner State so as to render it responsible for the alleged breach. To that extent, therefore, this Court would in principle be mandated to apply the ILC’s Articles to disputes brought before it. The question, however, is the applicability of the Articles to the present dispute which pits a Partner State against a private juridical person. 18. The jurisdiction of this Court is clearly spelt out in Articles 27 and 30(1) of the Treaty. Article 27(1) grants the Court jurisdiction over the interpretation and application of the Treaty. Article 30(1) of the Treaty then prescribes what entities may refer a matter to the Court for determination, the entities against which such matter may be referred and the causes of action that the Court may adjudicate. The Article reads: “Subject to the provisions of Article 27 of this Treaty, any person who is resident in a Partner State may refer for determination by the Court, the legality of any Act, regulation, directive, decision or action of a Partner State or an institution of the Community on the grounds that such Act, regulation, directive, decision or action is unlawful or is an infringement of the provisions of this Treaty.” The Treaty thus explicitly mandates natural or juridical persons that are resident in any of the Partner States to refer a dispute to this Court. REFERENCE No. 10 OF 2013 Page 10