The cornerstone of the World Court's identity is its resolution of inter-state disputes. This insightful critique challenges the implication that individuals have little importance in such disputes as a result. Arguing for individuals' enhanced integration, it reveals their relevance in a myriad of disputes beyond those centred on violations of multilateral human rights treaties and unveils a multitude of procedural practices with unquenched potential. It also carefully unpacks and interrogates the Court's legal reasoning in various contexts such as territorial and maritime disputes, amongst others. Finally, it critically analyses and evaluates the legal and political underpinnings for the Court's approaches and state litigants' choices from a lens of social idealism. This pioneering study sheds light on the imbalance between individuals as key stakeholders in inter-state disputes and their treatment in law and practice.