After learning on 31 March 2014, that the International Court of Justice had voted twelve votes to four1 to find that Japan was not in compliance with its international obligations under the International Convention to Regulate Whaling,2 former Australian Green Party leader Bob Brown called the decision “a whale of win.”3 The Japanese delegation at The Hague tersely indicated that Japan could abide by the Judgment.4 Of course, sometimes victories are Pyrrhic and the rigors of commitment to honor an adverse judgment are dependent on what it requires. In this sense, the outcome in the Whaling in the Antarctic case is not so straight-forward. In assessing whether the decision was a victory of form over function one needs to consider that Japan can still continue its whaling operations in the North Pacific and has the opportunity to develop a new scientific research plan solicitous of the Court’s concerns in order to resume whaling in Southern Ocean waters.5