For these reasons,
by twelve votes to four,
rejects the first Preliminary Objection ;
by ten votes to six,
rejects the second Preliminary Objection ;
by nine votes to seven,
joins the third Preliminary Objection to the merits ;
by ten votes to six,
joins the fourth Preliminary Objection to the merits.
Done in English and French, the English text being authoritative,
at the Peace Palace, The Hague, this twenty-fourth day of July, one
thousand nine hundred and sixty-four, in three copies, one of which
will be placed in the archives of the Court and the others transmitted
to the Government of the Kingdom of Belgium and to the Government
of the Spanish State respectively.
(Signed) Percy C. SPENDER,
President.
(Signed) GARNIER-COIGNET,
Registrar.
President Sir Percy SPENDERmakes the following declaration
1 concur in the Judgment of the Court. 1 wish, however, to say a
few words on the second Preliminary Objection of the Government of
Spain.
Whilst the text of Article 37 of the Court's Statute is quite different
to that of Article 36 (5), which was the subject of examination in
Israel v. Bulgaria, and its terms are, in my view, so clear as to admit
of no doubt as to their meaning, it is difficult to discern any decisive
distinction in principle between Article36 (5) and Article 37 in relation
to the cardinal questions raised by the second Prelirninary Objection.
For my part, for reasons which appear in the Joint Dissenting Opinion
in Israel v. Bulgaria, to which 1 continue to adhere, 1 would, apart
from other considerations referred to in the Court's Judgment, be
compelled to reject this Prelirninary Objection.
For these reasons,
by twelve votes to four,
rejects the first Preliminary Objection ;
by ten votes to six,
rejects the second Preliminary Objection ;
by nine votes to seven,
joins the third Preliminary Objection to the merits ;
by ten votes to six,
joins the fourth Preliminary Objection to the merits.
Done in English and French, the English text being authoritative,
at the Peace Palace, The Hague, this twenty-fourth day of July, one
thousand nine hundred and sixty-four, in three copies, one of which
will be placed in the archives of the Court and the others transmitted
to the Government of the Kingdom of Belgium and to the Government
of the Spanish State respectively.
(Signed) Percy C. SPENDER,
President.
(Signed) GARNIER-COIGNET,
Registrar.
President Sir Percy SPENDERmakes the following declaration
1 concur in the Judgment of the Court. 1 wish, however, to say a
few words on the second Preliminary Objection of the Government of
Spain.
Whilst the text of Article 37 of the Court's Statute is quite different
to that of Article 36 (5), which was the subject of examination in
Israel v. Bulgaria, and its terms are, in my view, so clear as to admit
of no doubt as to their meaning, it is difficult to discern any decisive
distinction in principle between Article36 (5) and Article 37 in relation
to the cardinal questions raised by the second Prelirninary Objection.
For my part, for reasons which appear in the Joint Dissenting Opinion
in Israel v. Bulgaria, to which 1 continue to adhere, 1 would, apart
from other considerations referred to in the Court's Judgment, be
compelled to reject this Prelirninary Objection. BARCELONA TRACTION (ARRÊT)
Par ces motifs,
par douze voix contre quatre,
rejette la première exception préliminaire ;
par dix voix contre six,
rejette la deuxième exception préliminaire ;
par neuf voix contre sept,
joint au fond la troisième exception préliminaire ;
par dix voix contre six,
joint au fond la quatrième exception préliminaire.
Fait en anglais et en français, le texte anglais faisant foi, au Palais
de la Paix, à La Haye, le vingt-quatre juillet mil neuf cent soixante-
quatre, en trois exemplaires, dont l'un restera déposéaux archives de la
Cour et dont les autres seront transmis respectivement au Gouvernement
du Royaume de Belgique et au Gouvernement de 1'Etat espagnol.
Le Président,
(Signé) Percy C. SPENDER.
Le Greffier,
(Signé) GARNIER-COIGNET.
Sir Percy SPENDER,Président, fait la déclaration suivante
Je m'associe à l'arrêtde la Cour. Je voudrais cependant dire quelques
mots de la deuxième exception préliminaire présentCepar le Gouveme-
ment espagnol.
Si le texte de l'artic37 du Statut de la Cour est fort différent de celui
de l'article36, paragraphe 5, qui était à l'examer, dans l'affaire Israël
c. Bulgarie - et les termes de l'article 37 sont à mon avis si clairs
qu'aucun doute n'est permis sur leur sens -, une distinction décisive,
en principe, n'en est pas moins difficile à faire entre l'articl36, para-
graphe 5,et l'articl37 pour ce qui est desquestions essentielles soulevées
par la deuxième exception préliminaire.
En ce qui me concerne, les motifs indiqués dans l'opinion dissidente
collective en l'affairesraëlc.Bulgarie, motifs quime paraissent toujours
valables, m'obligeraient, indépendamment des autres considCrations
énoncCesdans l'arrêtde la Cour, à rejeter cette exception prdirninaire.
45
Declaration of President Sir Percy Spender (as appended immediately after the judgment)