The international law, in the form of several dozens of UN General Assembly and Security Council resolutions, has already confirmed the Palestinian right to repossess their lands and to return to their homes over 130 times in 62 years. A resolution of particular importance to property affirmed regularly is, for example, Resolution A/RES/52/62 “Palestine refugees’ property and their revenues” of 10 December 1997...This resolution and others like it affirmed also the entitlement of Palestinians to the revenues from their property since 1948. The problem of course is that Western colonial powers, which created Israel in the first place, blocked any implementation of these resolutions and vetoed any resolution which called for Israel’s sanctions.
First of all, let's clear up one basic matter:
UN GA resolutions and non-Chapter VII Security Council resolutions are not binding and do not constitute "international law".
And secondly, if there is a right of "repossession", it is that of the Jews.
...the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and...Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country;...
And a professor of international law sent this to me:
There is no doctrine in international law which gives a people the right to claim possession of property simple because it was previously owned or possessed by others of their ethnicity. Nor is there any doctrine of international law that grants people the right to cross international borders and take up residence in other countries simply on the basis of property ownership or possessory rights.
There is no doctrine of general international law that grants Arabs, as opposed to Jews, unique rights to property from which they might have been dispossessed.
There are also numerous peoples around the world, including Palestinian Arabs, Germans, Russians and others, who had the legal rights in property of members of their group adversely affected by wars of their choosing. International law does not require universally overriding domestic legislation and restoring the property rights adversely affected by those rights. There are limited doctrines of international law protecting property rights in certain circumstances. None of these doctrines protects anywhere near what the Palestinians claims as property rights.
Under international law, several dozens and even several hundreds of UN General Assembly resolutions do not constitute “the international law.” Under international law, all General Assembly resolutions and nearly all Security Council resolutions constitute nothing more than the recommendations of the representatives of the governments of states of the world. Thus, the ability of Muslim and Arab countries to pass at will UN General Assembly resolutions denying the legal rights of the Jewish people, including their right to self-determination, and asserting imaginary Palestinian Arab rights, such as the imagined right to murder Jewish Israeli civilians as “resistance,” does not alter international law.
Incidentally, no Security Council resolution has ever purported to "confirm the Palestinian right to repossess their lands and to return to their homes."