Legal Response International » Difference between ‘taking note of’ and ‘adopting’

Difference between ‘taking note of’ and ‘adopting’

All reasonable efforts have been made to ensure the accuracy of this information at the time the advice was produced (please refer to the date produced below). However, the materials have been prepared for informational purposes only and may have been superseded by more recent developments. They do not constitute formal legal advice or create a lawyer-client relationship. You should seek legal advice to take account of your own interests. To the extent permitted any liability is excluded. Those consulting the database may wish to contact LRI for clarifications and an updated analysis.

Date produced: 19/12/2009

Does ‘taking note’ have the same legal status as ‘adoption‘ (as it was referred by a UN policy rep in session)?

“Adoption” and “taking note” cannot have the same legal status (otherwise, you would not go for the latter, having failed to achieve the former – Parties are not so ignorant that they would fail to understand the difference).

The key distinction would be that “taking note” of the Accord would not in any way bind Parties to the details of it.

Having said that, it may be that the policy rep rather than upping the value of “taking note” was actually downplaying the value of “adoption”. If it had been “adopted” it would have been adopted as a COP decision only – and as we have seen over the course of this process, COP decisions are not (generally) binding on the Parties, so even adoption would not have had much effect.

The aim of “taking note” appears to be to give formal recognition within the process to a statement without it having the actual endorsement of the Parties to the proceedings.