Abstract: This chapter explores an underexamined category of international judicial remedies: pronouncements that a state’s breach of legal obligations renders specific actions by other actors – particularly other states – permissible or required. Traditionally, such responses are adopted unilaterally, based on a state’s self-assessment of a violation and its corresponding remedy. International courts (ICs) typically examine these measures retrospectively, determining their legality after adoption. In international trade law, however, a distinct approach has emerged, requiring that responses to wrongful conduct be adopted only after their permissibility is adjudicated. This chapter investigates the potential for extending this concept to other regimes, analysing the feasibility of ICs authorising permissible responses through ex ante judicial remedies. It addresses questions of justiciability, the admissibility of pre-emptive requests for declarations of legality, and the scope of IC jurisdiction over such responses. By introducing an element of centralisation to international law’s typically decentralised enforcement mechanisms, judicial determinations of permissible responses hold particular significance. This centralising effect is especially pronounced in regimes, such as international investment law and international criminal law, where IC rulings can trigger enforcement measures against the wrongdoer by the coercive apparatus of states.