Charter of the United Nations and Statute of the International Court of Justice, San Francisco, 26 June 1945.

Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Vienna, 23 May 1969, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1155, p. 331.

Exchanges of Letters between the Government of New Zealand and the Government of France concerning the Implementation of the Ruling of 6 July 1986 by the Secretary-General of the United Nations Pertaining to the Differences between the Two Governments Arising from the Rainbow Warrior Affair, Reports of International Arbitral Awards, vol. XIX, p. 216.

Supplementary Agreement between the Government of the French Republic and the Government of New Zealand relating to an Arbitral Tribunal, New York, 14 February 1989, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1559, No. 27132, p. 243.

Agreement between the Government of the French Republic and the Government of New Zealand on the Establishment of a Fund to Promote Friendly Relations between Citizens of the Two Countries, Wellington, 29 April 1991, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1668, No. 28701, p. 357.

International Law Commission, Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, 2001.

International Court of Justice, Corfu Channel Case (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v. Albania), Judgment of 15 December 1949, I.C.J. Reports 1949, p. 244.

New Zealand, High Court, Auckland Registry, R. v. Mafart and Prieur, 22 November 1985, International Law Reports, vol. 74, p. 241.

Case concerning the differences between New Zealand and France arising from the Rainbow Warrior affair, Ruling of 6 July 1986 by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Reports of International Arbitral Awards, vol. XIX, pp. 199-221.

Case concerning the difference between New Zealand and France concerning the interpretation or application of two agreements, concluded on 9 July 1986 between the two States and which related to the problems arising from the Rainbow Warrior Affair, Decision of 30 April 1990, Reports of International Arbitral Awards, vol. XX, pp. 215-284 (see in particular, Separate opinion of Sir Kenneth Keith, pp. 276-284).

International Court of Justice, Gabčikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment of 25 September 1997, I.C.J. Reports 1997, p. 7.

International Court of Justice, Case concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), Judgment of 26 February 2007, I.C.J. Reports 2007, p. 43.

Memorandum of the Government of New Zealand to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, in Case concerning the differences between New Zealand and France arising from the Rainbow Warrior affair, Ruling of 6 July 1986 by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Reports of International Arbitral Awards, vol. XIX, p. 201.

Communiqué du Premier Ministre français en date du 22 septembre 1985, in Case concerning the differences between New Zealand and France arising from the Rainbow Warrior affair, Ruling of 6 July 1986 by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Reports of International Arbitral Awards, vol. XIX, p. 204.

Lettre en date du 8 août 1985 adressée par M. François Mitterand, président de la République française, à M. David Lange, premier ministre de la Nouvelle-Zélande, in Case concerning the differences between New Zealand and France arising from the Rainbow Warrior affair, Ruling of 6 July 1986 by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Reports of International Arbitral Awards, vol. XIX, p. 205.

Memorandum of the Government of the French Republic to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, in Case concerning the differences between New Zealand and France arising from the Rainbow Warrior affair, Ruling of 6 July 1986 by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Reports of International Arbitral Awards, vol. XIX, p. 207.

G. Apollis, “Le règlement de l’affaire du “Rainbow Warrior”, Revue Générale de Droit International Public, vol. 91, 1987, pp. 9–43.

C. M. Beresovski, “A Proposal to Deny Foreign Sovereign Immunity to Nations Sponsoring Terrorism”, American University Journal of International Law and Policy, vol. 6, 1990–1991, pp. 77–109.

C. Chatterjee, “The Rainbow Warrior Arbitration between New Zealand and France”, Journal of International Arbitration, vol. 9(1), 1992, pp. 17–28.

J. Charpentier, “L’affaire du Rainbow Warrior”, Annuaire français de droit international, vol. 31, 1985, pp. 210-220.

J. Charpentier, “L’affaire du Rainbow Warrior: le règlement interétatique”, Annuaire français de droit international, vol. 32, 1986, pp. 873-385.

J. Charpentier, “L’affaire du Rainbow Warrior: la sentence arbitrale du 30 avril 1990 (Nouvelle-Zélande c/France)”, Annuaire français de droit international, vol. 36, 1990, pp. 395–407.

J. S. Davidson, “The Rainbow Warrior Arbitration concerning the Treatment of the French Agents Mafart and Prieur”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 40, 1991, pp. 446–457.

C. Dominicé, “De la réparation constructive du préjudice immatériel souffert par un État”, in M. Rama-Montaldo (ed.), El derecho internacional en un mundo en transformación, Fundación de Cultura Universitaria Montevideo, Montevideo, 1994, pp. 505–522.

I. Gidley and R. Shears, The Rainbow Warrior Affair, Allen and Unwin, London, 1986.

G. Guillaume, “L’affaire du “Rainbow Warrior” et son règlement”, in G. Guillaume (ed.), Les grandes crises internationales et le droit, Editions du Seuil, Paris, 1994, pp. 219–238.

C. Harding, “Vingt Ans Après: Rainbow Warrior, Legal Ordering, and Legal Complexity”, Singapore Year Book of International Law, vol. 10, 2006, pp. 99–116.

C. Hoss and J. Morgan-Foster, “The Rainbow Warrior”, in R. Wolfrum (ed.), The Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2010.

L. Migliorino, “Giurisdizione dello stato territoriale rispetto ad azioni non autorizzate di agenti di stati stranieri”, Rivista di Diritto Internazionale, vol. 71, 1988, pp. 784–801.

L. Migliorino, “Sur la déclaration d’illicéité comme forme de satisfaction: à propos de la sentence arbitrale du 30 avril 1990 dans l’affaire du Rainbow Warrior”, Revue Générale de Droit International Public, vol. 96, 1992, pp. 61–74.

G. Palmisano, “Sulla decisione arbitrale relativa alla seconda fase del caso “Rainbow Warrior”, Rivista di Diritto Internazionale, vol. 73, 1990, pp. 874–910.

R. Pinto, “L’affaire du Rainbow Warrior: à propos de la sentence arbitrale du 30 avril 1990 (Nouvelle Zélande c/France)”, Journal du droit international (Clunet), vol. 117, 1990, pp. 841–896.

M. Pugh, “Legal Aspects of the Rainbow Warrior Affair”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 36 (3), 1987, pp. 655–669.

C. Reymond, “The Rainbow Warrior Arbitration between Greenpeace and France”, Journal of International Arbitration, vol. 9(1), 1992, pp. 91–93.

S. Seidel, “Der Fall Rainbow Warrior”, Humanitäres Völkerrecht, vol. 8, 1995, pp. 158–161.

J. Wexler, “The Rainbow Warrior Affair: State and Agent Responsibility for Authorized Violations of International Law”, Boston University International Law Journal, vol. 5, 1987, pp. 389–412.

S. Wittich, “Awe of the Gods and Fear of the Priests: Punitive Damages and the Law of State Responsibility”, Austrian Review of International and European Law, vol. 3, 1998, pp. 101–157.