COUR INTERNATIONALE DE JUSTICE
RECUEIL DES ARRETS,
AVIS CONSULTATIFS ET ORDONNANCES
CERTAINES QUESTIONS DE PROCÉDURE
RELATIVES A L'INTERPRÉTATION DES
TRAITÉS DE PAIX CONCLUS
AVEC LA BULGARIE, LA HONGRIE
ET LA ROUMANIE
ORDONNANCE DU 7 NOVEMBRE 1949
INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
REPORTS OF JUDGMENTS,
ADVISORY OPINIONS AND ORDERS
CERTAIN PROCEDURAL QUESTIONS
RELATING TO THE INTERPRETATION
OF PEACE TREATIES WITH BULGARIA,
HUNGARY AND ROMANIA
ORDEROF NOVEMBER7th 1949 La présente ordonnance doit êtrecitée comme suit :
(Interprétationdes Traitésde paix,
Ordonnancedu 7 novembre1949: '
C. I.J. Recueil 1949P. 229.»
This Order should be cited as follows :
4'Interp~.efatofnPeace Trealies, Order of November7th, I94:
I. C. J. Reports 1949P. 229."
- --
NO de vente:
a n e 24 1 INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
Sovember 7th
YEAR 1949 General Li:t
No. 8
Ordermade on November 7th 1949.
CERTAIN PROCEDURAL QUESTIONS
RELATING TO THE INTERPRETATION
OF PEACE TREATIES WITH BULGARLA,
HUNGARY AND ROMANIA
The Acting President of the International Court of Justice,
Having regard to Articles 48, 63, 66 and 68 of the Statute,
Having regard to Article 37 of the Rules of Court,
Makes the following Order:
Whereas, on the aznd October, 1949, the General Assembly of
the United Nations adopted a Resolution by the terms of which
it requested the Court for an Advisory Opinion on the following
questions :
"1. Do the diplomatic exchanges between Bulgaria, Hungary
and Romania on the one hand and certain Allied and
Associated Powers signatones to the Treaties of Peace
on the other, concerning the implementation of Article
of the Treaties with Bulgaria and Hungary and Article 3
of the Treaty with Romania, disclose disputes subject
to the provisions for the settlement of disputes con-
tained in Article 36of theTreaty of Peacewith Bulgaria,
Article 40 of the Treaty of Peace with Hungary, and
Article 38 of the Treaty of Peace with Romania?"
In the event of an affirmative reply to question 1:
"II. Are the Governments of Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania
obligated to carry out the provisions of the Articles
4 referred to in question 1, including the provisions for
the appointment of their representatives to the Treaty
Commissions ?"
In the event of an affirmative reply to question II ,and if within
thirty days from the date when the Court delivers its opinion,
the Governments concerned have not notified the Secretary-
General that they have appointed their representatives to the
Treaty Commissions, andthe Secretary-General has so advised
the International Court of Justice :
"III. If one party fails to appoint a representative to a Treaty
Commission under the Treaties of Peace with Bulgaria,
Hungary and Romania where that party is obligated to
appoint a representative to the Treaty Commission, is
the Secretary-General of the United Nations authorized
to appoint the third member of the Commission upon
the request of the other party to a dispute according
to the provisions of the respective Treaties ?"
In the event of an affirmative reply to question III
"IV. Would a Treaty Commission composed of a representative
of one party and a third member appointed by the
Secretary-General of the United Nations constitute a
Commission, within the meaning of the relevant Treaty
articles, competent to make a definitive and binding
decision in settlement of a dispute ?"
Whereas a certified true copy of the English and French texts
of the Resolution of the General Assembly was transmitted to the
Court by means of a letter dated 31st October, 1949, signed by
the Secretary-General of the United Nations ;
Whereas on the 7th November, 1949, the Registrar, in pur-
suance of paragraph I of Article 66 of the Statute, gave notice of
the request for an advisory opinion to al1States entitled to appear
before the Court ;
Whereas, on the same date, the Registrar, in pursuance of
paragraph 2, Article 66, of the Statute, gave notice to al1 States
entitled to appear before the Court and who signed the Peace
Treaties concerned, and, in pursuance of paragraph I of Article 63,
and of Article 68 of the Statute, to the other signatory States of
these Peace Treaties, that the Court was prepared to receive
written statements relating to the question : ORDER OF 7 XI 49 (INTERPRETATION OF PEACE TREATIES) 231
I. Appoints Monday, January 16th, 1g50, as the date of expiry
of the time-limit within which the aforesaid States may filewritten
statements.
2. Reserves the rest of the procedure for further decision.
Done in English and in French, the French text being author-
itative, at the Peace Palace, The Hague, this seventh day of
November, one thousand nine hundred and forty-nine.
(Signed) J. G. GUERRERO,
Acting President.
(Signed) E. HAMBRO,
Registrar.
COUR INTERNATIONALE DE JUSTICE
RECUEIL DES ARRETS,
AVIS CONSULTATIFS ET ORDONNANCES
CERTAINES QUESTIONS DE PROCÉDURE
RELATIVES A L'INTERPRÉTATION DES
TRAITÉS DE PAIX CONCLUS
AVEC LA BULGARIE, LA HONGRIE
ET LA ROUMANIE
ORDONNANCE DU 7 NOVEMBRE 1949
INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
REPORTS OF JUDGMENTS,
ADVISORY OPINIONS AND ORDERS
CERTAIN PROCEDURAL QUESTIONS
RELATING TO THE INTERPRETATION
OF PEACE TREATIES WITH BULGARIA,
HUNGARY AND ROMANIA
ORDEROF NOVEMBER7th 1949 La présente ordonnance doit êtrecitée comme suit :
(Interprétationdes Traitésde paix,
Ordonnancedu 7 novembre1949: '
C. I.J. Recueil 1949P. 229.»
This Order should be cited as follows :
4'Interp~.efatofnPeace Trealies, Order of November7th, I94:
I. C. J. Reports 1949P. 229."
- --
NO de vente:
a n e 24 1 COUR INTERNATIONALE DE JUSTICE
1949
.e7 novembre
RBle gCn6raI
no8
Ordonnancerendue le 7 novembre 1949.
CERTAINES QUESTIONS DE PROCÉDURE
RELATIVES A L'INTERPRÉTATION DES
TRAITÉS DE PAIX CONCLUS
AVEC LA BULGARIE, LA HONGRIE
ET LA ROUMANIE
Le Président en exercice de la Cour internationale de Justice,
Vu les articles 48, 63, 66 et 68 du Statut,
Vu l'article 37 du Règlement,
Rend d'ordonnancesuivante :
Considérantqu'à la date du 22 octobre 1949,l'Assembléegénérale
des Nations Unies'a adopté une Résolution aux termes de laquelle
elie demande à la Cour un avis consultatif sur les questions sui-
vantes :
((1. Ressort-il de la correspondance diplomatique échangée
entre la Bulgarie, la Hongrie et la Roumanie, d'une
part, et certaines Puissances alliéeset associéessigna-
taires des Traités de paix, d'autre part, touchant
l'application de l'articl2 des Traités avec la Bulgarie
et la Hongrie et de l'article 3 du Traité avec la Rou-
manie, qu'il existe des différends pour lesquels l'arti-
cle 36 du Traitéde paix avec la Bulgarie, l'article 40 du
Traité de paix avec la Hongrie et l'articl38 du Traité
de paix avec la Roumanie prévoient une procédure
de règlement ? »
Si la réponse à la question 1 est affirmative:
((II. Les Gouvernements de la Bulgarie, de la Hongrie et
de la Roumanie sont-ils tenus d'exécuter les clauses INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
Sovember 7th
YEAR 1949 General Li:t
No. 8
Ordermade on November 7th 1949.
CERTAIN PROCEDURAL QUESTIONS
RELATING TO THE INTERPRETATION
OF PEACE TREATIES WITH BULGARLA,
HUNGARY AND ROMANIA
The Acting President of the International Court of Justice,
Having regard to Articles 48, 63, 66 and 68 of the Statute,
Having regard to Article 37 of the Rules of Court,
Makes the following Order:
Whereas, on the aznd October, 1949, the General Assembly of
the United Nations adopted a Resolution by the terms of which
it requested the Court for an Advisory Opinion on the following
questions :
"1. Do the diplomatic exchanges between Bulgaria, Hungary
and Romania on the one hand and certain Allied and
Associated Powers signatones to the Treaties of Peace
on the other, concerning the implementation of Article
of the Treaties with Bulgaria and Hungary and Article 3
of the Treaty with Romania, disclose disputes subject
to the provisions for the settlement of disputes con-
tained in Article 36of theTreaty of Peacewith Bulgaria,
Article 40 of the Treaty of Peace with Hungary, and
Article 38 of the Treaty of Peace with Romania?"
In the event of an affirmative reply to question 1:
"II. Are the Governments of Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania
obligated to carry out the provisions of the Articles
4 des articles mentionnés à la question 1, notamment
celles qui concernent la désignation de leurs repré-
sentants aux commissions prévues par les Traités ? ))
Si la réponse à la question II est affirmative, et si, dans les
trente jours de la date où la Cour aura rendu son avis, les
Gouvernements intéressés n'ont pas fait connaitre au Secré-
taire général qu'ils ont désigné leurs représentants aux
commissions prévues par les Traités, et si le Secrétaire
généralen a informéla Cour internationale de Justice :
« III. Le Secrétaire généraldes Nations Unies est-il autorisé,
si l'une des parties ne désignepas de représentant à
une commission prévue par les Traités de paix avec
la Bulgarie, la Hongrie et la Roumanie, alors qu'elle
est tenue d'en désignerun, à désigner le tiers membre
de la commission sur la demande de l'autre partie
au différend, conformément aux dispositions des
Traités en cause ? ))
Si la rCponse à la question III est affirmative
« IV. Une commission prévuepar les Traitésqui serait compo-
sée d'un représentant de l'une des parties et d'un
tiers membre désignépar le Secrétaire généraldes
Nations Unies serait-elle considérée comme com-
mission au sens des articles pertinents des Traités
et qualifiée pour prendre des décisionsdéfinitives et
obligatoires dans le règlement d'un différend? ))
Considérant que la copie certifiée conforme des textes français
et anglais de la Résolution de l'Assembléegénéralea ététransmise
à la Cour par une lettre datée du 31 octobre 1949 et signéedu
Secrétaire général desNations Unies ;
Considérantqu'à la date du 7 novembre 1949, le Greffier a notifié
la requête,,conformément à l'article 66, paragraphe I, du Statut,
à tous les Etats admis à ester en justice devant la Cour ;
Considérant qu'à la même date le Greffier, conformément à
1:article66, paragraphe 2, du Statut, a fait connaitre à tous les
Etats admis à ester en justice devant la Cour et signataires des
traités de paix précités ainsique, en app!ication des articles 63,
paragraphe I, et 68 du Statut, aux autres Etats signataires desdits
Traités que la Cour était disposée à recevoir d'eux des exposés
écrits: referred to in question 1, including the provisions for
the appointment of their representatives to the Treaty
Commissions ?"
In the event of an affirmative reply to question II ,and if within
thirty days from the date when the Court delivers its opinion,
the Governments concerned have not notified the Secretary-
General that they have appointed their representatives to the
Treaty Commissions, andthe Secretary-General has so advised
the International Court of Justice :
"III. If one party fails to appoint a representative to a Treaty
Commission under the Treaties of Peace with Bulgaria,
Hungary and Romania where that party is obligated to
appoint a representative to the Treaty Commission, is
the Secretary-General of the United Nations authorized
to appoint the third member of the Commission upon
the request of the other party to a dispute according
to the provisions of the respective Treaties ?"
In the event of an affirmative reply to question III
"IV. Would a Treaty Commission composed of a representative
of one party and a third member appointed by the
Secretary-General of the United Nations constitute a
Commission, within the meaning of the relevant Treaty
articles, competent to make a definitive and binding
decision in settlement of a dispute ?"
Whereas a certified true copy of the English and French texts
of the Resolution of the General Assembly was transmitted to the
Court by means of a letter dated 31st October, 1949, signed by
the Secretary-General of the United Nations ;
Whereas on the 7th November, 1949, the Registrar, in pur-
suance of paragraph I of Article 66 of the Statute, gave notice of
the request for an advisory opinion to al1States entitled to appear
before the Court ;
Whereas, on the same date, the Registrar, in pursuance of
paragraph 2, Article 66, of the Statute, gave notice to al1 States
entitled to appear before the Court and who signed the Peace
Treaties concerned, and, in pursuance of paragraph I of Article 63,
and of Article 68 of the Statute, to the other signatory States of
these Peace Treaties, that the Court was prepared to receive
written statements relating to the question : I. Décidede fixer au lundi 16 janvier 1950l'expiration du délai
dans lequel pourraient êtredéposés lesdits exposésécrits.
2. Réservela suitede la procédure.
Fait en français et en anglais, le texte français faisant foi, au
Palais de la Paix à La Haye, le sept novembre mil neuf cent
quarante-neuf.
Le Président en exercice,
(Signé)J. G. GUERRERO.
Le Greffier de la Cour,
(Signé) E. HAMBRO. ORDER OF 7 XI 49 (INTERPRETATION OF PEACE TREATIES) 231
I. Appoints Monday, January 16th, 1g50, as the date of expiry
of the time-limit within which the aforesaid States may filewritten
statements.
2. Reserves the rest of the procedure for further decision.
Done in English and in French, the French text being author-
itative, at the Peace Palace, The Hague, this seventh day of
November, one thousand nine hundred and forty-nine.
(Signed) J. G. GUERRERO,
Acting President.
(Signed) E. HAMBRO,
Registrar.
Fixing of time-limit: Writte Statements (First phase)
Order of 7 November 1949