This book offers a bold new perspective on how international adjudication operates.

While international courts claim to decide all disputes over which they have jurisdiction, this book argues that sometimes they strategically choose not to. Through detailed case studies and a close analysis of international procedural law, it reveals that courts decide most disputes most of the time - but not all.

By unpacking how courts use doctrines of jurisdiction and admissibility to avoid or narrow down certain issues, the book exposes the covert techniques of judicial avoidance. It shows how the flexibility of international procedural law allows judges to manage politically sensitive disputes without openly acknowledging that they are relying on avoidance doctrines.

This book offers a nuanced and realistic account of international adjudication, one that recognises how legal principle is often weighed against political and practical realities.