Так как Богетский договор прекратил

Так как Богетский договор прекратил свое действие по отношению к Адаве, заключение о признании юрисдикции суда ipso facto является ничтожным, а иным способом государство не воспользовалось. По этой же причине, Международный Суд не может рассмотреть дело по заявлению Адавы, так как она не высказала согласие ни односторонним заявлением, ни статьей в договоре, ни специальным соглашением. На основании вышеизложенного, Адава не является правопреемником союза Адава-Зентуйя.

Результаты (английский) 1:

Since Bogetsky contract ceased to have effect with respect to Adawa, a finding of jurisdiction of the court is ipso facto null and void, and the state has not used in any other way. For the same reason, the International Court can not consider the case at the request Adawa, as it has made no agreement or unilateral declaration, nor the article in the treaty or special agreement.
Based on the foregoing, Adawa not a legal successor of the union Adawa-Zentuyya.

Результаты (английский) 2:

Since the Bogeta Treaty ceased to apply to Adawa, the conclusion of recognition of the court's jurisdiction ipso facto is insignificant, and otherwise the state has not taken advantage. For the same reason, the International Court of Justice cannot hear the case on Adawa's application, as it has not agreed to either a unilateral statement, an article in the treaty, or a special agreement.
On the basis of the foregoing, Adawa is not the successor to the Adawa-Sentuya union.

Результаты (английский) 3:

Because of the termination of the jurisdiction over adava by the Treaty of Fichte, the decision on the recognition of the jurisdiction of the court was in fact invalid and was not otherwise used by the state. For the same reason, the International Court of justice could not hear adawa's application because it did not agree with either the unilateral declaration or the terms of the treaty, There is no special agreement.
As a result, adawa is not the successor of the adawa zentuya alliance.