Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - The International Court of Justice finds that there is no need to indicate interim measures of protection

r~he iolloi!fii>$ iliormtion from the iisgistry of -Lhe ïîl-iernatiori_al
Court of JusLice is cor~~:~unicatsd to the prsss:

In the Ii~terhzxiel case (~rqitzerland v, the Ui~itecl Stztes of
Rrzerica 1, the L!?Leri?atiorial Goni-t oî iJustice kas foüild, by an Order
of October, 2!4th, 19Y,, t,at thereis rioneecl to ir?Uicate interirn
meaçwe s oS pro te $ion .

l The Interharidel cctse wzs br~uglt befare the Court by an
1957, by whicli
Application cif éh@ Srciss Goverment of Octebei- 2rid,
the Sourt I~BS asIieiC1to &clare that the Goveriûnent of the United
States w2s uuiùcr an abligaticn ta restare to li~berharidel, a corqmy
entereci in the Cormercial Regis'ter of Basle, its assets which liad
been vested in ihe United States es froiil1/&3. Gn October ird, the
STliiss Gomr~ment asked 'EheCourzto ir~acats, as ai icterfm rneasure
of protection, and for 3s long as the, case was peildiilg, that the
Ufiiteci States shoulcl r?oL part r.!iGhthose assets and in pariicular,

not sel1 the silares of the kneral îi~lilirieand Film Corporation.

T'rie;teque sl;for the indicr;itirrriof interir11 i:iL.asui-eof protection
ras d~alt with as a nwt,ker of prioribjr. During hearings on October 12th
and Ii+th, the Gourt heard aral argruxni; by the Parties on the su'nject.
The Court aloo took cognlsaj-lce of written statein~nts subseyuently
presented by the Parties. Thc decision nmd.e by the Court relied upon

a statement of October 19th by iiiiickithe Gomrx-ment, of the United States'
dcclared thai; i.C wzs not takinp action 2i; the gresen$ tti~~~to fi;: a. .
time scheduie for the sale of the sharesin q~kestion.

The Mvernment oi the IJnited States h2,d conbendzd that the Court
had no jurisdiction to &val with the matter of the sale or disposition
of the shares, On thatpoirit, the Orcier issued 'oy the Court states
that Preli-knary Objectiorls arc dealt with by epplying a procedure

other than that vfiiichtias been provided forraquesis :or tne fiidLicatian
of interirn neastires of protection;if the contentioi~ of .the United
States were i~aii~t~iiied, it v~ocild i'all ta be dealt 1~5th by kkie Co~~rt in
aue course. In thik c~i>:~e~.ti~il, the Urder states that this procedure
in no w2y ~rr3jt1ùi~~s the Jurisi'ictioi~ of the Court ta deal rrith the
rmrits of the case and leavesuiiaffected the rightof the respondent
tc subd-L argw.ents agaiiiçt suc11 ;jurisdlction.

E
k K.

At,tachcd to -the Order are:

- a Vepar~ts OpirZon of Judge Klacstad who conslders that the Court
has no jurisciic-tion, in wucli Opifion IJresident Eachl-tii arid

Judge 3ead concur;
- a Separate Opinion cf Judgc 51r Hcrscn Lzuterpacht 1!~ho,while being
in .agreement with the cperative pzrt cf tile Orcbeï. also considers
that the Coart is ~Lthou-t jurisdickion;
- a Declaratiori by Judge 'tJellington i<oo who agrees with the operalim
part rJl'cilout, shnririthe reasons upoil ~IYiiciîit is b~sed, and Îinally, '
- a Decl,?raiiun by Judge Ilajewiikov who is ulzable to agree riritlthe Order.
%

Gn October 2&th, 1957; the Cvurt alço issuedan Order fixing
tiriie .limits for the lx-cserita.tion of tlîe I+i~n1orial of the Siss
Goverment on the merlts and for the presenta.tior! of the Counter-
Nemcrial or any I'reliminary Cjbjections af the Govcrnment of the
United States, The rast of the procedure is reserved for further
decislon,