Chapter 6 analyzes judicial interpretations of the principle of unnecessary suffering through a review of major cases and legal precedents. The chapter begins with the International Committee of the Red Cross’s (ICRC) stance on nuclear weapons, utilizing its records on Hiroshima and Nagasaki to examine the developing humanitarian issues related to these weapons. The subsequent sections examine case law from both international and national courts, highlighting significant rulings by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) that often referred to the ICRC studies. The cases of Marshall Islands v. United Kingdom and the nuclear weapons advisory opinion illustrate the complexities involved in the application of the norm against unnecessary suffering within the law of armed conflict (LOAC). National cases such as Shimoda v. The State provide insights into judicial approaches to the health impacts of specific weapons, offering a legal perspective on the humanitarian aspects of warfare. Chapter 6 examines the difficulties courts encounter in reconciling military objectives with humanitarian considerations.