Links

Site search
Document search
Contact

The Court

History
Members of the Court
Presidency
Chambers and Committees
Judges ad hoc
How the Court Works
Financial Assistance to Parties
Annual Reports

The Registry

Registrar
Organizational Chart of the Registry
Texts governing the Registry
Library of the Court
Employment
University traineeship program
Internships
Procurement

Cases

List of All Cases
Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders

Basic Documents

Charter of the United Nations
Statute of the Court
Rules of Court
Practice Directions
Other Texts

Jurisdiction

Contentious Jurisdiction
Advisory Jurisdiction

Press Room

Press releases
Calendar
Media Services
Multimedia
Frequently Asked Questions

Practical Information

Directions
Visits
Links
Frequently Asked Questions

Publications

Introduction

Permanent Court of International Justice

Series A: Collection of Judgments (1923-1930)
Series B: Collection of Advisory Opinions (1923-1930)
Series A/B: Collection of Judgments, Orders and Advisory Opinions (from 1931)
Series C: Acts and documents relating to Judgments and Advisory Opinions given by the Court / Pleadings, Oral Arguments and Documents
Series D: Acts and Documents concerning the organization of the Court
Series E: Annual Reports
Series F: General Indexes
Other documents


Français

Certain Property (Liechtenstein v. Germany)

Overview of the case

By an Application filed in the Registry on 1 June 2001, Liechtenstein instituted proceedings against Germany relating to a dispute concerning

“decisions of Germany, in and after 1998, to treat certain property of Liechtenstein nationals as German assets having been ‘seized for the purposes of reparation or restitution, or as a result of the state of war’ — i.e., as a consequence of World War II —, without ensuring any compensation for the loss of that property to its owners, and to the detriment of Liechtenstein itself”.

The historical context of the dispute was as follows. In 1945, Czechoslovakia confiscated certain property belonging to Liechtenstein nationals, including Prince Franz Josef II of Liechtenstein, pursuant to the “Beneš Decrees”, which authorized the confiscation of “agricultural property” (including buildings, installations and movable property) of “all persons belonging to the German and Hungarian people, regardless of their nationality”. A special regime with regard to German external assets and other property seized in connection with the Second World War was created under the Convention on the Settlement of Matters Arising out of the War and the Occupation (Chapter Six), signed in 1952 at Bonn. In 1991, a painting by the Dutch master Pieter van Laer was lent by a museum in Brno (Czechoslovakia) to a museum in Cologne (Germany) for inclusion in an exhibition. This painting had been the property of the family of the Reigning Prince of Liechtenstein since the eighteenth century ; it was confiscated in 1945 by Czechoslovakia under the Beneš Decrees. Prince Hans-Adam II of Liechtenstein, acting in his personal capacity, then filed a lawsuit in the German courts to have the painting returned to him as his property, but that action was dismissed on the ground that, under Article 3, Chapter Six, of the Settlement Convention (paragraphs 1 and 3 of which are still in force), no claim or action in connection with measures taken against German external assets in the aftermath of the Second World War was admissible in German courts. A claim brought by Prince Hans-Adam II before the European Court of Human Rights regarding the decisions of the German courts was also dismissed.

In its Application, Liechtenstein requested the Court “to adjudge and declare that Germany has incurred international legal responsibility and is bound to make appropriate reparation to Liechtenstein for the damage and prejudice suffered”. It further requested “that the nature and amount of such reparation should, in the absence of agreement between the parties, be assessed and determined by the Court, if necessary in a separate phase of the proceedings”. As a basis for the Court’s jurisdiction, Liechtenstein invoked Article I of the European Convention for the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes, signed at Strasbourg on 29 April 1957.

Liechtenstein filed its Memorial on 28 March 2002, within the time-limit fixed by the Court. On 27 June 2002, Germany filed preliminary objections to jurisdiction and admissibility and the proceedings on the merits were accordingly suspended. On 15 November 2002, Liechtenstein filed its written observations on the preliminary objections of Germany within the time-limit prescribed by the President of the Court.

Following public hearings on the preliminary objections of Germany in June 2004, the Court delivered its Judgment on 10 February 2005. The Court began by examining Germany’s first preliminary objection, which argued that the Court lacked jurisdiction because there was no dispute between the Parties. The Court rejected this objection, finding that there existed a legal dispute between the Parties, namely a dispute as to whether, by applying Article 3, Chapter Six, of the Settlement Convention to Liechtenstein property that had been confiscated by Czechoslovakia in 1945, Germany was in breach of the international obligations it owed to Liechtenstein and, if so, what was the extent of its international responsibility.

The Court then considered Germany’s second objection, which required it to decide, in the light of the provisions of Article 27 (a) of the European Convention for the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes, whether the dispute related to facts or situations that arose before or after 18 February 1980, the date on which that Convention entered into force between Germany and Liechtenstein. The Court noted in this respect that it was not contested that the dispute had been triggered by the decisions of the German courts in the aforementioned case. The critical issue, however, was not the date on which the dispute arose, but the date of the facts or situations in relation to which the dispute arose. In the Court’s view, the dispute brought before it could only relate to the events that transpired in the 1990s if, as argued by Liechtenstein, in that period, Germany had either departed from a previous common position that the Settlement Convention did not apply to Liechtenstein property, or if German courts, by applying their earlier case law under the Settlement Convention for the first time to Liechtenstein property, had applied that Convention “to a new situation” after the critical date. Having found that neither was the case, the Court concluded that, although these proceedings had been instituted by Liechtenstein as a result of decisions by German courts concerning a painting by Pieter van Laer, the events in question had their source in specific measures taken by Czechoslovakia in 1945, which had led to the confiscation of property owned by some Liechtenstein nationals, including Prince Franz Jozef II of Liechtenstein, as well as in the special regime created by the Settlement Convention, and that the source or real cause of the dispute was accordingly to be found in the Settlement Convention and the Beneš Decrees. The Court therefore upheld Germany’s second preliminary objection, finding that it could not rule on Liechtenstein’s claims on the merits.


This overview is provided for information only and in no way involves the responsibility of the Court.

Institution of proceedings

Written proceedings

Preliminary Objections of the Federal Republic of Germany

27 June 2002
Procedure(s): Preliminary objections
Available in:
English

Observations of the Principality of Liechtenstein

15 November 2002
Procedure(s): Preliminary objections
Available in:
English

Oral proceedings

Verbatim record 2004/24

Public sitting held on Monday 14 June 2004, at 10 a.m., at the Peace Palace, President Shi presiding
Procedure(s): Preliminary objections
Available in:
Original Language
Translation
(bilingual version) Translation

Verbatim record 2004/25

Public sitting held on Wednesday 16 June 2004, at 10 a.m., at the Peace Palace, President Shi presiding
Procedure(s): Preliminary objections
Available in:
Original Language
Translation
(bilingual version) Translation

Verbatim record 2004/26

Public sitting held on Thursday 17 June 2004, at 10 a.m., at the Peace Palace, President Shi presiding
Procedure(s): Preliminary objections
Available in:
Original Language
Translation
(bilingual version) Translation

Verbatim record 2004/27

Public sitting held on Friday 18 June 2004, at 10 a.m., at the Peace Palace, President Shi presiding
Procedure(s): Preliminary objections
Available in:
Original Language
Translation
(bilingual version) Translation

Orders

Order of 28 June 2001

Fixing of time-limits: Memorial and Counter-Memorial
Available in:
English French

Order of 12 July 2002

Fixing of time-limit: Written Statement of observations and submissions on Preliminary Objections
Available in:
English French Bilingual

Judgments

Summaries of Judgments and Orders

Summary 2005/1

Summary of the Judgment of 10 February 2005
Available in:
English French

Press releases

Press release 2001/14

1 June 2001
Liechtenstein institutes proceedings against Germany concerning "decisions of Germany to treat certain property of Liechtenstein nationals as German assets seized for purposes of reparation as a consequence of World War II without ensuring any compensation"
Available in:
English French

Press release 2001/19

29 June 2001
Certain Property (Liechtenstein v. Germany) - Fixing of time-limits for the filing of written pleadings
Available in:
English French

Press release 2002/20

26 July 2002
Certain Property (Liechtenstein v. Germany) - Fixing of the time-limit within which the Principality of Liechtenstein may present a written statement on the preliminary objections made by the Federal Republic of Germany
Available in:
English French

Press release 2004/14

16 March 2004
Certain Property (Liechtenstein v. Germany) - Preliminary Objections - The Court will hold public hearings from 14 to 18 June 2004
Available in:
English French

Press release 2004/20

27 May 2004
Certain Property (Liechtenstein v. Germany) - Preliminary Objections - Schedule of public hearings to be held from 14 to 18 June 2004
Available in:
English French

Press release 2004/21

18 June 2004
Certain Property (Liechtenstein v. Germany) - Preliminary Objections - Conclusion of the public hearings; Court ready to begin its deliberation
Available in:
English French

Press release 2005/2

2 February 2005
Certain Property (Liechtenstein v. Germany) - Preliminary Objections - Court to deliver its Judgment on Thursday 10 February 2005 at 3 p.m.
Available in:
English French

Press release 2005/4

10 February 2005
Certain Property (Liechtenstein v. Germany) - Preliminary Objections - The Court finds that it has no jurisdiction to decide the dispute
Available in:
English French