The legal consequence of the principle of sovereign equality is the fact that the jurisdiction of international courts and tribunals in inter-State disputes is contingent on consent of the disputing States. Consent to jurisdiction may be expressed in different forms but requires in each instance the demonstration of unequivocal acceptance of consent. The case law is abundant on and under which circumstances consent can be considered present. Interestingly, the criteria that are set forward in the case law appear to present two different standards for determining whether consent to jurisdiction has been expressed. This arises unequivocally in the English and French texts of the relevant judicial decisions.

中文翻译：

---

确定同意管辖权的模棱两可或明确的障碍

主权平等原则的法律后果是，国际法院和法庭对国家间争端的管辖权取决于争端国的同意。对管辖权的同意可以以不同的形式表达，但在每种情况下都需要证明对同意的明确接受。判例法丰富，在哪些情况下可以认为同意存在。有趣的是，判例法中提出的标准似乎提出了两种不同的标准来确定是否已经表达了对管辖权的同意。这在相关司法裁决的英文和法文文本中明确出现。