Provisional measures
OVERVIEW OF THE CASE
On 9 April 1984 Nicaragua filed an Application instituting proceedings against the United States of America, together with a Request for the indication of provisional measures concerning a dispute relating to responsibility for military and paramilitary activities in and against Nicaragua. On 10 May 1984 the Court made an Order indicating provisional measures. One of these measures required the United States immediately to cease and refrain from any action restricting access to Nicaraguan ports, and, in particular, the laying of mines. The Court also indicated that the right to sovereignty and to political independence possessed by Nicaragua, like any other State, should be fully respected and should not be jeopardized by activities contrary to the principle prohibiting the threat or use of force and to the principle of non-intervention in matters within the domestic jurisdiction of a State. The Court also decided in the aforementioned Order that the proceedings would first be addressed to the questions of the jurisdiction of the Court and of the admissibility of the Nicaraguan Application. Just before the closure of the written proceedings in this phase, El Salvador filed a declaration of intervention in the case under Article 63 of the Statute, requesting permission to claim that the Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain Nicaragua’s Application. In its Order dated 4 October 1984, the Court decided that El Salvador’s declaration of intervention was inadmissible inasmuch as it related to the jurisdictional phase of the proceedings.
After hearing argument from both Parties in the course of public hearings held from 8 to 18 October 1984, on 26 November 1984 the Court delivered a Judgment stating that it possessed jurisdiction to deal with the case and that Nicaragua’s Application was admissible. In particular, it held that the Nicaraguan declaration of 1929 was valid and that Nicaragua was therefore entitled to invoke the United States declaration of 1946 as a basis of the Court’s jurisdiction (Article 36, paragraphs 2 and 5, of the Statute). The subsequent proceedings took place in the absence of the United States, which announced on 18 January 1985 that it “intends not to participate in any further proceedings in connection with this case”. From 12 to 20 September 1985, the Court heard oral argument by Nicaragua and the testimony of the five witnesses it had called. On 27 June 1986, the Court delivered its Judgment on the merits. The findings included a rejection of the justification of collective self‑defence advanced by the United States concerning the military or paramilitary activities in or against Nicaragua, and a statement that the United States had violated the obligations imposed by customary international law not to intervene in the affairs of another State, not to use force against another State, not to infringe the sovereignty of another State, and not to interrupt peaceful maritime commerce. The Court also found that the United States had violated certain obligations arising from a bilateral Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Navigation of 1956, and that it had committed acts such to deprive that treaty of its object and purpose.
It decided that the United States was under a duty immediately to cease and to refrain from all acts constituting breaches of its legal obligations, and that it must make reparation for all injury caused to Nicaragua by the breaches of obligations under customary international law and the 1956 Treaty, the amount of that reparation to be fixed in subsequent proceedings if the Parties were unable to reach agreement. The Court subsequently fixed, by an Order, time‑limits for the filing of written pleadings by the Parties on the matter of the form and amount of reparation, and the Memorial of Nicaragua was filed on 29 March 1988, while the United States maintained its refusal to take part in the case. In September 1991, Nicaragua informed the Court, inter alia, that it did not wish to continue the proceedings. The United States told the Court that it welcomed the discontinuance and, by an Order of the President dated 26 September 1991, the case was removed from the Court’s List.
This overview is provided for information only and in no way involves the responsibility of the Court.
Institution of proceedings
Written proceedings
9 April 1984
Procedure(s):Provisional measures
Available in:
30 June 1984
Procedure(s):Questions of jurisdiction and/or admissibility
Available in:
15 August 1984
Procedure(s):Intervention
Available in:
17 August 1984
Procedure(s):Questions of jurisdiction and/or admissibility
Available in:
10 September 1984
Procedure(s):Intervention
Available in:
Oral proceedings
Oral Arguments on the Request for the Indication of Provisional Measures - Minutes of the Public Sittings held at the Peace Palace, The Hague, on 25 and 27 April and 10 May 1984, President Elias presiding
Procedure(s):Provisional measures
Available in:
Oral Arguments on Jurisdiction and Admissibility - Minutes of the Public Sittings held at the Peace Palace, The Hague, from 8 to 18 October and 26 November 1984, President Elias presiding
Procedure(s):Questions of jurisdiction and/or admissibility
Available in:
Oral Arguments on the Merits - Minutes of the Public Sittings held at the Peace Palace, The Hague, from 12 to 20 September 1985 and on 27 June 1986, President Nagendra Singh presiding
Available in:
Other documents
8 October 1984
Procedure(s):Questions of jurisdiction and/or admissibility
Available in:
13 September 1985
Available in:
15 October 1985
Available in:
Orders
Request for the indication of Provisional Measures
Procedure(s):Provisional measures
Available in:
Fixing of time-limits: Memorial and Counter-Memorial (Jurisdiction and Admissibility)
Available in:
Declaration of Intervention of the Republic of El Salvador
Procedure(s):Intervention
Available in:
Fixing of time-limits: Memorial and Counter-Memorial (Merits)
Available in:
Fixing of time-limits: Memorial and Counter-Memorial (Reparation)
Available in:
Judgments
Jurisdiction of the Court and Admissibility of the Application
Procedure(s):Questions of jurisdiction and/or admissibility
Available in:
Merits
Available in:
Summaries of Judgments and Orders
Press releases
9 April 1984
Nicaragua Institutes Proceedings against the United States of America
Available in:
13 April 1984
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Appointment of Agents by Nicaragua and the United States of America
Available in:
16 April 1984
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - The President of the Court appeals to both Parties
Available in:
18 April 1984
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Public hearing to be held on Wednesday 25 April 1984 at 10 a.m.
Available in:
28 April 1984
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Request for the indication of provisional measures - Conclusion of the public hearings
Available in:
7 May 1984
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Request for the indication of interim measures of protection - Court to give its decision on Thursday 10 May 1984 at 12 noon
Available in:
10 May 1984
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - The International Court of Justice indicates provisional measures
Available in:
15 May 1984
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Jurisdiction of the Court - Fixing of time-limits for the filing of written pleadings
Available in:
2 July 1984
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Jurisdiction and Admissibility - Filing of the Counter-Memorial of the United States of America
Available in:
16 August 1984
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - El Salvador requests permission to intervene
Available in:
17 August 1984
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - The United States has filed its Counter-Memorial
Available in:
27 September 1984
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Hearing to open on 8 October 1984
Available in:
5 October 1984
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Declaration of Intervention of El Salvador
Available in:
8 October 1984
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Opening of the public hearings
Available in:
10 October 1984
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Hearing in Progress
Available in:
18 October 1984
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Closure of hearing
Available in:
19 November 1984
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Judgment to be delivered on Monday, 26 November at 10 a.m.
Available in:
26 November 1984
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Judgment of the Court
Available in:
23 January 1985
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Proceedings on the merits
Available in:
26 June 1985
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Hearing to open on the merits
Available in:
10 September 1985
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Hearing to open on the merits
Available in:
18 September 1985
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Progress of Public Hearings
Available in:
23 September 1985
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Progress and conclusion of public hearings
Available in:
13 June 1986
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Judgment on the merits to be delivered on Friday, 27 June at 9.30 a.m.
Available in:
27 June 1986
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Judgment of the Court
Available in:
20 November 1987
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Reparation - Fixing of the time-limits for the filing of written pleadings
Available in:
30 March 1988
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Filing of the Memorial of Nicaragua
Available in:
1 August 1988
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Filing of a Counter-Memorial by the United States of America
Available in:
29 June 1990
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Postponement of oral proceedings on compensation
Available in:
27 September 1991
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) - Removal of the case of the Court's list
Available in:
Correspondence
OVERVIEW OF THE CASE
On 14 October 1983 Burkina Faso (then known as Upper Volta) and Mali notified to the Court a Special Agreement referring to a Chamber of the Court the question of the delimitation of part of the land frontier between the two States. This Chamber was constituted by an Order of 3 April 1985. Following grave incidents between the armed forces of the two countries at the very end of 1985, both Parties submitted parallel requests to the Chamber for the indication of interim measures of protection. The Chamber indicated such measures by an Order of 10 January 1986.
In its Judgment delivered on 22 December 1986, the Chamber began by ascertaining the source of the rights claimed by the Parties. It noted that, in that case, the principles that ought to be applied were the principle of the intangibility of frontiers inherited from colonization and the principle of uti possidetis juris, which accords pre-eminence to legal title over effective possession as a basis of sovereignty, and whose primary aim is to secure respect for the territorial boundaries which existed at the time when independence was achieved. The Chamber specified that, when those boundaries were no more than delimitations between different administrative divisions or colonies all subject to the same sovereign, the application of the principle of uti possidetis juris resulted in their being transformed into international frontiers, as in the instant case.
It also indicated that it would have regard to equity infra legem, that is, that form of equity which constitutes a method of interpretation of the law and which is based on law. The Parties also relied upon various types of evidence to give support to their arguments, including French legislative and regulative texts or administrative documents, maps and “colonial effectivités” or, in other words, the conduct of the administrative authorities as proof of the effective exercise of territorial jurisdiction in the region during the colonial period. Having considered those various kinds of evidence, the Chamber defined the course of the boundary between the Parties in the disputed area. The Chamber likewise took the opportunity to point out, with respect to the tripoint Niger-Mali-Burkina Faso, that its jurisdiction was not restricted simply because the endpoint of the frontier lay on the frontier of a third State not a party to the proceedings. It further pointed out that the rights of Niger were in any event safeguarded by the operation of Article 59 of the Statute of the Court.
This overview is provided for information only and in no way involves the responsibility of the Court.
Institution of proceedings
Written proceedings
30 December 1985
Procedure(s):Provisional measures
Available in:
Oral proceedings
Minutes of the Public Sittings - held at the Peace Palace, The Hague, on 9 and 10 January 1986, President of the Chamber, Judge Bedjaoui, presiding
Procedure(s):Provisional measures
Available in:
Minutes of the Public Sittings - held at the Peace Palace, The Hague, from 16 to 26 June and on 22 December 1986, President of the Chamber, Judge Bedjaoui, presiding
Available in:
Orders
Request for the indication of Provisional Measures
Procedure(s):Provisional measures
Available in:
Judgments
Available in:
Summaries of Judgments and Orders
Press releases
25 October 1983
Upper Volta and Mali bring a case before the Court
Available in:
10 April 1985
The Court forms a Chamber to deal with the case submitted by Burkina Faso and Mali
Available in:
22 April 1985
Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Mali) - Chamber to hold first public sitting
Available in:
1 May 1985
Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Mali) - Judge Mohamed Bedjaoui elected President of the Chamber formed to deal with the case - Solemn declarations of Judges ad hoc François Luchaire and Georges Michel Abi-Saab
Available in:
6 January 1986
Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Mali) - Chamber of Court to hear Burkina Faso and Mali on possible indication of provisional measures
Available in:
10 January 1986
Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Mali) - Provisional measures are indicated in the case of the Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Mali)
Available in:
3 April 1986
Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Mali) - Filing of Counter-Memorials by the Parties
Available in:
5 June 1986
Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Mali) - Hearing to open on Monday 16 June 1986
Available in:
30 June 1986
Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Mali) - Progress and conclusion of public hearings
Available in:
12 December 1986
Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Mali) - Judgment to be delivered in Frontier Dispute case between Burkina Faso and the Republic of Mali
Available in:
22 December 1986
Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Mali) - Judgment of the Chamber
Available in:
16 January 1987
Reactions to the Judgment of 22 December 1986 in the case concerning the Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Republic of Mali)
Available in:
Correspondence
OVERVIEW OF THE CASE
On 10 August 1976, Greece instituted proceedings against Turkey in a dispute over the Aegean Sea continental shelf. It asked the Court in particular to declare that the Greek islands in the area were entitled to their lawful portion of continental shelf and to delimit the respective parts of that shelf appertaining to Greece and Turkey. At the same time, it requested provisional measures indicating that, pending the Court’s judgment, neither State should, without the other’s consent, engage in exploration or research with respect to the shelf in question. On 11 September 1976, the Court found that the indication of such measures was not required and, as Turkey had denied that the Court was competent, ordered that the proceedings should first concern the question of jurisdiction. In a Judgment delivered on 19 December 1978, the Court found that jurisdiction to deal with the case was not conferred upon it by either of the two instruments relied upon by Greece : the application of the General Act for Pacific Settlement of International Disputes (Geneva, 1928) — whether or not it was in force — was excluded by the effect of a reservation made by Greece upon accession, while the Greco-Turkish press communiqué of 31 May 1975 did not contain an agreement binding upon either State to accept the unilateral referral of the dispute to the Court.
This overview is provided for information only and in no way involves the responsibility of the Court.
Institution of proceedings
Written proceedings
10 August 1976
Procedure(s):Provisional measures
Available in:
26 August 1976
Procedure(s):Provisional measures
Available in:
18 July 1977
Procedure(s):Questions of jurisdiction and/or admissibility
Available in:
Oral proceedings
Oral arguments on the Request for the indication of Interim Measures of Protection - Minutes of the Public Sittings held at the Peace Palace, The Hague, from 25 to 27 August and on 11 September 1976, President Jiménez de Aréchaga presiding
Procedure(s):Provisional measures
Available in:
Oral Arguments on Jurisdiction - Minutes of the Public Sittings held at the Peace Palace, The Hague, from 9 to 17 October and on 19 December 1978, President Jiménez de Aréchaga presiding
Procedure(s):Questions of jurisdiction and/or admissibility
Available in:
Other documents
24 August 1976
Available in:
28 September 1976
Available in:
Orders
Request for the Indication of Interim Measures of Protection
Procedure(s):Provisional measures
Available in:
Judgments
Jurisdiction of the Court
Procedure(s):Questions of jurisdiction and/or admissibility
Available in:
Summaries of Judgments and Orders
Press releases
10 August 1976
La Grèce dépose une requête contre la Turquie (French version only)
Available in:
12 August 1976
Plateau continental de la mer Egée (Grèce c. Turquie) - La Cour tiendra une séance privée le lundi 16 août 1976 (French version only)
Available in:
19 August 1976
Plateau continental de la mer Egée - L'audience sur la demande en indication de mesures conservatoires se tiendra le mercredi 25 août 1976 (French version only)
Available in:
25 August 1976
Plateau continental de la mer Egée - Audience publique du 25 août 1976 (French version only)
Available in:
26 August 1976
Plateau continental de la mer Egée - Audience du 26 août 1976 (French version only)
Available in:
27 August 1976
Plateau continental de la mer Egée - Audience du 27 août 1976 (French version only)
Available in:
8 September 1976
Plateau continental de la mer Egée - La Cour rendra sa décision sur la demande en indication de mesures conservatoires le samedi 11 septembre 1976 (French version only)
Available in:
11 September 1976
Plateau continental de la mer Egée (Grèce c. Turquie) - La Cour décide de ne pas indiquer de mesures conservatoires (French version only)
Available in:
14 October 1976
Plateau continental de la mer Egée (Grèce c. Turquie) - Le Président de la Cour fixe des délais pour la procédure orale (French version only)
Available in:
18 April 1977
Aegean Sea Continental Shelf (Greece v. Turkey) - The Court extends time-limits for written proceedings
Available in:
18 July 1977
Aegean Sea Continental Shelf (Greece v. Turkey) - Filing of Memorial by Government of Greece
Available in:
25 April 1978
Aegean Sea Continental Shelf (Greece v. Turkey) - Date for the opening of hearings on the question of the Court's jurisdiction
Available in:
3 October 1978
Aegean Sea Continental Shelf (Greece v. Turkey) - Oral proceedings
Available in:
4 October 1978
Aegean Sea Continental Shelf (Greece v. Turkey) - Opening of oral proceedings
Available in:
17 October 1978
Aegean Sea Continental Shelf (Greece v. Turkey) - Closure of oral proceedings
Available in:
14 December 1978
Aegean Sea Continental Shelf (Greece v. Turkey) - The Court will deliver its Judgment on the question of its jurisdiction on Tuesday 19 December 1978
Available in:
19 December 1978
Aegean Sea Continental Shelf (Greece v. Turkey) - Judgment on the question of the Court's jurisdiction
Available in:
Correspondence
OVERVIEW OF THE CASE
On 9 May 1973, Australia and New Zealand each instituted proceedings against France concerning tests of nuclear weapons which France proposed to carry out in the atmosphere in the South Pacific region. France stated that it considered the Court manifestly to lack jurisdiction and refrained from appearing at the public hearings or filing any pleadings. By two Orders of 22 June 1973, the Court, at the request of Australia and New Zealand, indicated provisional measures to the effect, inter alia, that pending judgment France should avoid nuclear tests causing radioactive fall-out on Australian or New Zealand territory. By two Judgments delivered on 20 December 1974, the Court found that the Applications of Australia and New Zealand no longer had any object and that it was therefore not called upon to give any decision thereon. In so doing the Court based itself on the conclusion that the objective of Australia and New Zealand had been achieved inasmuch as France, in various public statements, had announced its intention of carrying out no further atmospheric nuclear tests on the completion of the 1974 series.
This overview is provided for information only and in no way involves the responsibility of the Court.
Institution of proceedings
Written proceedings
14 May 1973
Procedure(s):Provisional measures
Available in:
18 May 1973
Procedure(s):Intervention
Available in:
29 October 1973
Procedure(s):Questions of jurisdiction and/or admissibility
Available in:
Oral proceedings
Oral Arguments on the Request for the Indication of Interim Measures of Protection - Minutes of the Public Sittings held at the Pease Palace, The Hague, on 24 and 25 May 1973, President Lachs presiding, and on 22 June 1973, Vice-President Ammoun presiding
Procedure(s):Provisional measures
Available in:
Oral Arguments on Jurisdiction and Admissibility - Minutes of the Public Sittings held at the Peace Palace, The Hague, on 10 and 11 July and 20 December 1974, President Lachs presiding
Procedure(s):Questions of jurisdiction and/or admissibility
Available in:
Other documents
1 June 1973
Available in:
Orders
Request for the indication of measures of protection and fixing of time-limits: Memorial and Counter-Memorial
Procedure(s):Provisional measures
Available in:
Application by Fiji for Permission to Intervene
Procedure(s):Intervention
Available in:
Application by Fiji for Permission to Intervene
Procedure(s):Intervention
Available in:
Judgments
Procedure(s):Questions of jurisdiction and/or admissibility
Available in:
Summaries of Judgments and Orders
Press releases
14 May 1973
Essais nucléaires (Nouvelle-Zélande c. France) - La Nouvelle-Zélande demande à la Cour d'indiquer des mesures conservatoires (French version only)
Available in:
17 May 1973
Essais nucléaires - La France n'accepte pas la juridiction de la Cour (French version only)
Available in:
17 May 1973
Essais nucléaires - Les audiences s'ouvriront le lundi 21 mai à 15 heures (French version only)
Available in:
18 May 1973
Essais nucléaires - Composition des délégations (French version only)
Available in:
25 May 1973
Essais nucléaires - Audiences du 21 au 25 mai 1973 (French version only)
Available in:
20 June 1973
Essais nucléaires - Le rendu des décisions de la Cour sur les demandes en indication de mesures conservatoires aura lieu le vendredi 22 juin 1973 (French version only)
Available in:
22 June 1973
Essais nucléaires (Nouvelle Zélande c. France) - La Cour internationale de Justice indique des mesures conservatoires (French version only)
Available in:
12 July 1973
Essais nucléaires - Requêtes à fin d'intervention (French version only)
Available in:
8 August 1973
Essais nucléaires - Déclarations publiées dans la presse (French version only)
Available in:
7 September 1973
Suite de la procédure dans l'affaire des Essais nucléaires (Nouvelle Zélande c. France) (French version only)
Available in:
24 June 1974
Essais nucléaires - Début des audiences le jeudi 4 juillet 1974 (French version only)
Available in:
9 July 1974
Essais nucléaires - Composition des délégations (French version only)
Available in:
11 July 1974
Essais nucléaires - Audiences des 10 et 11 juillet 1974 (French version only)
Available in:
16 December 1974
La Cour rendra ses arrêts dans les deux affaires des Essais nucléaires le vendredi 20 décembre 1974 à 15 heures (French version only)
Available in:
20 December 1974
Essais nucléaires (Australie c. France) - Arrêt de la Cour (French version only)
Available in:
Correspondence
OVERVIEW OF THE CASE
In 1942 the Government of the United States vested almost all the shares of the General Aniline and Film Corporation (GAF), a company incorporated in the United States, on the ground that those shares, which were owned by Interhandel, a company registered in Basel, belonged in reality to I.G. Farbenindustrie of Frankfurt, or that GAF was in one way or another controlled by the German company. On 1 October 1957, Switzerland applied to the Court for a declaration that the United States was under an obligation to restore the vested assets to Interhandel or, alternatively, that the dispute on the matter between Switzerland and the United States was one fit for submission for judicial settlement, arbitration or conciliation. Two days later Switzerland filed a Request for the indication of provisional measures to the effect that the Court should call upon the United States not to part with the assets in question so long as proceedings were pending before the Court. On 24 October 1957, the Court made an Order noting that, in the light of the information furnished, there appeared to be no need for provisional measures. The United States raised preliminary objections to the Court’s jurisdiction, and in a Judgment delivered on 21 March 1959 the Court found the Swiss application inadmissible, because Interhandel had not exhausted the remedies available to it in the United States courts.
This overview is provided for information only and in no way involves the responsibility of the Court.
Institution of proceedings
Written proceedings
3 October 1957
Procedure(s):Provisional measures
Available in:
11 October 1957
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
3 March 1958
Available in:
16 June 1958
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
20 September 1958
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
Oral proceedings
Minutes of the Public Sittings held at the Peace Palace, The Hague, on 12 and 14 October 1957, the Vice-President, Mr. Badawi, acting as President
Procedure(s):Provisional measures
Available in:
Minutes of the Public Sittings held at the Peace Palace, The Hague, from 5 to 17 November 1958, and on 21 March 1959, the President, Mr. Klaestad, presiding
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
Orders
Request for the indication of interim measures of protection (including the text of the declarations of Judges Hackworth, Read, Wellington Koo et Kojevnikov)
Procedure(s):Provisional measures
Available in:
Fixing of time-limit: Written Statement of observations and submissions on preliminary objections
Available in:
Judgments
Preliminary Objections (including the text of the declarations of Judges Basdevant, Kojevnikov, Judge ad hoc Carry, Zafrulla Khan)
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
Summaries of Judgments and Orders
Press releases
3 October 1957
The Swiss Confederation files an Application instituting proceedings against the United States of America
Available in:
4 October 1957
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - The Swiss Government files with the Registry a request for the indication of interim measures
Available in:
9 October 1957
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - The International Court of Justice fixes Saturday, October 12th, 1957, for the opening of the sittings
Available in:
10 October 1957
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Representatives of the Parties at the hearings which will begin on October 12th, 1957
Available in:
12 October 1957
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Sittings of October 12th, 1957
Available in:
14 October 1957
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Hearing of October 14th, 1957
Available in:
25 October 1957
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - The International Court of Justice finds that there is no need to indicate interim measures of protection
Available in:
16 January 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - The Swiss Confederation and the United States of America submit a joint application for an extension of the time-limits for the filing of the pleadings
Available in:
28 June 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - The Government of the United States files in the Registry Objections to the jurisdiction of the Court to adjudicate upon the Application submitted by the Government of the Swiss Confederation
Available in:
4 November 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Representatives of the Parties at the hearings which will begin on November 5th, 1958
Available in:
5 November 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Hearings of November 5th, 1958
Available in:
6 November 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Hearing of November 6th, 1958
Available in:
8 November 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Hearing of November 8th, 1958
Available in:
10 November 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Hearings of November 10th, 1958
Available in:
11 November 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Hearings of November 11th, 1958
Available in:
12 November 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Hearings of November 12th, 1958
Available in:
14 November 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Hearings of November 14th, 1958
Available in:
17 November 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Hearings of November 17th, 1958
Available in:
16 March 1959
Interhandel - The Court will read its Judgment on the Preliminary Objections on Saturday, March 21st, 1959
Available in:
Correspondence
OVERVIEW OF THE CASE
In 1933 an oil concession agreement was concluded between the Government of Iran and the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. In 1951, laws were passed in Iran for the nationalization of the oil industry. These laws resulted in a dispute between Iran and the company. The United Kingdom took up the company’s case and instituted proceedings before the Court. Iran disputed the Court’s jurisdiction. In its Judgment of 22 July 1952, the Court decided that it had no jurisdiction to deal with the dispute. Its jurisdiction depended on the declarations by Iran and the United Kingdom accepting the Court’s compulsory jurisdiction under Article 36, paragraph 2, of the Court’s Statute. The Court held that the declaration by Iran, which was ratified in 1932, covered only disputes based on treaties concluded by Iran after that date, whereas the claim of the United Kingdom was directly or indirectly based on treaties concluded prior to 1932. The Court also rejected the view that the agreement of 1933 was both a concessionary contract between Iran and the company and an international treaty between Iran and the United Kingdom, since the United Kingdom was not a party to the contract. The position was not altered by the fact that the concessionary contract was negotiated through the good offices of the Council of the League of Nations. By an Order of 5 July 1951, the Court had indicated interim measures of protection, that is, provisional measures for protecting the rights alleged by either party, in proceedings already instituted, until a final judgment was given. In its Judgment, the Court declared that the Order had ceased to be operative.
This overview is provided for information only and in no way involves the responsibility of the Court.