The Nicaragua v. Colombia judgment of 21 April 2022 is rich in its content, examining both jurisdictional and substantive issues of international law. In the Nicaragua v. Colombia case, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), for the first time, examined the question of whether the Court’s jurisdiction ratione temporis covers facts or events that allegedly occurred after the lapse of the title of jurisdiction. Furthermore, the Court made some important statements with regard to the customary law nature of relevant provisions of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. In this regard, the Court declared that Nicaragua’s straight baselines are contrary to customary international law as reflected in Article 7(1) of the Convention. The Nicaragua v. Colombia judgment provides a crucial precedent on this matter. In light of its importance, this article examines key issues of the judgment, inter alia: (1) jurisdiction ratione temporis of the ICJ, (2) Colombia’s contested activities in Nicaragua’s maritime zones, (3) the legality of Colombia’s “integrated contiguous zone,” (4) the artisanal fishing rights of the inhabitants of the San Andrés Archipelago, in particular the Raizales, and (5) the legality of Nicaragua’s straight baselines.