objection of Abuse of process in the international court of justice with emphasis on the case of Iran sanctions by the United States

After the withdrawal of joint comprehensive plan of action(JCPOA) by the President of the United States of America on May 8, 2018 and the imposition of new sanctions by Executive Order 13846 of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran to file a lawsuit in the International Court of Justice on July 16, 2018 under Article 22 of the JCPOA. The United States has claimed that the main reason for Iran's lawsuit is its withdrawal from the UN Security Council, and that this has nothing to do with the breach of the MOU. In this study, we seek to answer the question of under what circumstances the Court will pay attention to the preliminary objection of abuse in the present case and the procedure of the Court.

This research has been done in a descriptive analytical method by studying the opinions of the Court.

The study of the Court's case law leads to the conclusion that so far the Court has faced only this conditional negative aspect in the sense that it has accepted its principle but in no case has met the conditions for its application. From the point of view of the plaintiffs, it is understood that breach of good faith, lack of justice, denial after confession, change in the internal proceedings and use of court tools to resolve disputes with political motives are among the most important reasons for the abuse. It is from Darcy. In the case of breach of the MOU (due to sanctions), the Court rejected the US preliminary objection and stated that the US could not prove that the Iranian petition had anything to do with the dispute over the implementation or interpretation of the MOU.