Summary of the Order of 22 June 1973

Document Number
6117
Document Type
Number (Press Release, Order, etc)
1973/3
Date of the Document
Document File
Document

Summaries of Judgments, AdNot an official documentrs of the Internationa
l Court of Justice

NUCLEAR1I'ESTS CASE (NEW ZEALAND v.FRANCE)
(INTERIMPROTECTION)

Orderof 22 June 1973

The Court, by 8 votes to6, made an Order indicating, In its Order, theourtrecalls thaton 9 May 1973New
pending its final decision in the case1:rningNuclear ZealandinstitutedprcxeedingsagainstFranceinrespectof a
Tests (New Zealand v.France). the followiingprovisionaldispute asto thlegallityof atmosphericnucleartests inthe
measuresofprotection: SouthPacificregion. TheNew ZealandGovernmentasked
TheGovernmentsof New ZealandandFranceshouldeach the Court to adjudge and declare thatthe conduct by the
of them ensure thatno action of any kind is takenwhich French Governmentof nuclear tests in the South Pacific
mightaggravateorextendthedisputesubmitredtotheCourt regionthat giveisetoradio-activefall-outconstits vio-
orprejudicetherightsoftheotherPartyinrespectofthecar- lationof NewZealm~d's rightsunderinternational law,and
rying outof whateverdecision the Courtma.yrenderin the thattheserightswill~ violatedbyanyfurthersuchtests.On
case;and,inparticular,theFrenchGovernmentshouldavoid 14May the New ZealandGovernmentasked theCourt to
nucleartests causingthe depositof radio-active fall-outondicate interim measuresof protection.Inetterfromthe
thetemtory of NewZealand,theCookIslands,Niueorthe AmbassadorofFrancetothe Netherlands,handedbyhimto
TokelauIslands. theRegistraron 16May1973,theFrenchGovernmentstated
AsPresidentLachswasforhealthreasons:unabletoparti- thatit consideredthat the Court wasmanifestly not compe-
cipate, it was Vice-PresidentAmmoun who, in accord- tentinthecaseand thatit couldnotaccepttheCourt's juris-
ance with Article 45 of the Statute, presided and read diction,andthat accordinglytheFrenchGovernmentdid not
out the Order. Judge Dillard was likewise absent for intendtoappointanagent,andrequestedtheCourttoremove
health reasons,and the Courtwas therefon:composed as led the French Governmentto these conclusions wash had
follows: annexedtotheletter.
Vice-President Ammoun, Acting President; JudgesFor-
ster, Gros, Bengzon, Petrkn, Onyeama,Ignacio-Pinto,de The Court has indicatedinterimmeasureson the basisof
Castro,Morozov,JimknezdeArkchaga,SirHumphreyWal- Article41ofitsStatuteandtakingintoaccountthefollowing
dock, NagendraSinghand Ruda;Judgead hocSirGarfield considerationsntera!lia:
Barwick. -the material submittedto the Court leadsit to the con-
clusion,atthepresentstageoftheproceedings,thatthepro-
Of the Membersof the Courtwhovotedin favourof the visionsinvokedby theApplicantwithregard totheCourt's
indication of provisional measures, Judge:sJimknez de jurisdiction appear,primafacie, to afforda basison which
Adchaga, SirHumphreyWaldock,NagendmSinghandSir thatjurisdictionmightbefounded;
GarfieldBarwickeach appendedadeclaration. fthejudges
who votedagainst theindicationof the measures, Judges -it cannotbe assumedapriorithat theclaimsoftheNew
Ordera dissentingopinion.o-Pintoeacha~ppendetd othe ZealandGovernmentfallcompletelyoutside thepurviewof
the Court'sjurisdictionor that the Governmentmaynot be

Continued on next pageable to establisha legal interestin respdctthese claims questionofthejurisdictionofthe Courttodealwiththemer-
entitlingtheCourttoadmittheApplication; itsofthecase, oranyquestionrelatingtothe admissibilityof
-for thepurposeofthepresentproceedings,it sufficesto the Application,or relating to the merits themselves,and
observethat the informationsubmittetdo the Courtdoesnot leavesulnaffectetherightoftheFrenchGovernmentto sub-
excludethepossibilitythatamagetoNewZealandmightbe mitargumentsinrespectofthosequestions.
showntobe causedbythe depositonNewZealandtemtory The Courtfurtherdecidesthat the written pleadingshall
of radio-active fall-out resultingfrom suchts and to be firstbe addressedto the questionof the jurisdictionof the
irreparable. Courttoentertainthedispute,andofthe admissibilityofthe
The Court then says that it is unable toaccede at the Applical:ion,and fixes21 September1973 as thetime-limit
presentstageof the proceedirtgsto the requestmadeby the forthe MemorialoftheGovernmentofNewZealandand2 1
French Government that thecasebe removedfromthelist. December 1973as the time-limitfor theCounter-Memorial
However, thedecisiongiventodayinno wayprejudgesthe oftheFrenchGovernment.

Document file FR
Document
Document Long Title

Summary of the Order of 22 June 1973

Links