Order of 24 October 1957

Document Number
034-19571024-ORD-01-00-EN
Document Type
Incidental Proceedings
Date of the Document
Document File
Bilingual Document File

COUR INTERNATIONALE DE JUSTICE

RECUEIL DES ARRÊTS,

AVIS CONSULTATIFS ET ORDONNANCES

AFFAIRE DE L'INTERHANDEE

(SUISSC.ÉTATS-UNISD'AMÉRIQUE)

DEMANDE EN INDICATION
DE MESURES CONSERVATOIRES

ORDONNANCE DU 24 OCTOBRE 1957

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

REPORTS OF JUDGMENTS,
ADVISORY OPINIONS AND ORDERS

INTERHANDEL CASE

(SWITZERLANDv.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA)

REQUEST FOR THE INDICATION
OF INTERIM MEASURES OF PROTECTION

ORDEROF OCTOBER 24th, 1957 La présente ordonnance doit êtrecitée comme suit:
((Aflaire de Z'InterhandeZ(mesures conservatoires),

Ordonnance du 24 octobre1957: C. I. J.Recueil 1957,p. 105. »

This Order should be cited as follows :

"Interhandel Case (interim measures of protection),
Order of Octoberzgth,1957: I.C.J. Reports 1957,p. 105.''

NO de vente :
Sales number 169 / INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

October z4tk
General List
YEAR 1937 No. 34

Octoberqth, 1957

INTERHANDEL CASE

(SIVITZERLAKD v.USITED ST,4TES OF -4MERICA)

REQUEST FOR THE IXDICATIOS

OF ISTERIJI MEASURES OF PROTECTIOS

Present: Vice-PresidentB.-~DAw,ictingPreside;President HACK-
WORTH ; Jz~dges GÇERRERO, BASDEYAST,\VISIARSKI,
ZORICIC, KL- EST AD,READ, AR~I.-~sD-UGO';,KOJEV-

SIKOT~,Sir Muhammad ZAFRULLAKHAX, Sir Hersch
LAUTERPACHT JI,ORESOQI-IXTATAC , OR DOT.^^, LLIXG-
TON KOO; M. Paul CARRY,J~tdge ad hoc; Registrar
LOPEZOLIY~S.

composed as above,

after deliberation,
having regard to Articl41 and 48of the Statute of the Court,

having regard toArticle61 of the Rules of Court,
having regard to the Application, dated Octo~st, Igj7, and
handed to the Registrar on October znd, instituting proceedings
by the Swiss Confederation and submitting to the Court a dispute
between the Swiss Confederation and theted States of America,

in which the Court is asked:
4 "To adjudge and declare, whether the Government of the United
States of America appears or not, after considering the contentions
of the Parties,
I. that the Government of the United States of America is
under an obligation to restore the assets of the Société inter-
nationale pour participationsindztstrielleset conzmerciales.A.
(Interhandel) to that Company;
2.in the alternative, that the dispute is one which is fit for
submission for judicial settlement, arbitration or conciliation
under the conditions which it will be for the Court to deter-
mine."

Having regard to the letter dated October 3rd, 1957, and handed
to the Registrar on that day, in which the Agent for the Swiss
Government, whose appointment had been notified in the Appli-
.cation instituting proceedings, referred.to Article 41 of the Statute
and Article 61 of the Rules, relating to the indication of provisional
measures, and asked the Court:

"pending a final decision in the proceedings instituted by the
-1pplication of October ~st, to indicate the following measures:
(a) The Government of the United States of America is requested
to take no legislative, judicial, administrative or executive
step to part xvith the property which is claimed to be Swiss
property in the submissions of the S\vissApplication of Octo-
ber 1st instituting proceedings, so long as the case conceming
this dispute is pending before the International Court of Justice.
(b) In particular, the Government of the United States is requested
not to sel1the shares of the General Aniline and Film Corporation
claimed by the Swiss Fecleral Government as the property of
its nationals, so long as the proceedings in this dispute are
pending.
(c) In general, the Government of the United States should so
act that no measure whatever is taken which would prejudice
the right of Switzerland to execution of the judgment which
the Court will deliver, either on the merits or on the alternative
submission."

Makes the jollowing Order :

Whereas the Government of the United States of America was,
on October znd, 1957, notified by telegram of the filing of the
Alpplication instituting proceedings, of which a copy was at the
same time transmitted to it by letter; and whereas the submissions
set forth in the request for the indication of interim measures of
protection were, on October 3rd, 1957, conimunicated to that
Government, the text of the request being at the same time trans-
mitted to it by letter;
1Vhereas the request for the indication of interim measures of

protection was notified to the Secretary-General of the United
Nations with a reference to Article 41, paragraph 2, of the Statute;
5 Whereas on October Bth, 1957, the Swiss Government, through
the Co-Agent appointed by it, and the Government of the Cnited
States of America, through the Secretary of State, were notified
that the Court would sit on October ~zth, 1957, to hear the obser-

vations of the Parties on the request for the indication of interim
measures of protection;
Having regard to the letter of October gth, 1957, by which the
Ambassador to the Netherlands of the Cnited States of America
notified the appointment by his Government of an Agent and a
Co-Agent for the case;

Having regard to the letter of October ~oth, 1957, by which the
Ambassador to the Netherlands of the Cnited States of America
informed the Registrar of the intention of his Government to
raise a preliminary objection in connection with the proceedings
instituted before the Court by the Government of Switzerland and
adding that this objection would be filed in the Registry by the
Agents for the LTnited States of America on October 11th in the
following terms :

"Prelimiilary objection of the United States of America:
The Goverilment of the United States of America, through its
Co-Agents Loftus Becker and Dallas S. Towrnsend,herewith files a
prelinlinary objection under Article62 of the Rules of the Court,
to the proceecliiigs instituteby the Governrnent of Switzerland
in the Interhandel case by its application of October I, 1957, in
so far as that application relates to the sale or other disposition of
the shares of General Aniline and Film Corporation non held b~.
the United States Government. The United States Government
has determined that such sale or disposition of the shares in the
American corporation, title to which is held by the United States
Government in the exercise of its sovereign authority, is a matter
essentially xrithin its domestic jurisdiction. Accordingly, pursuant
to paragraph (b)of the conditions attached to this Coiintry'saccep-
1910, this country respectfiilly declines, \rithout prejudice to other
and fiirther preliminar~.objections \\.hich it map file, to submit the
matter of the sale or dispositib:l of siich shares to the jiirisdiction
of the Coiirt."

\Vhereas on October ~oth, 1957, a cop3- of the above text was
communicated to the Co-Agent for the Swiss Government, and
whereas that text was confirmed and signed by the Co-Agents for
the Government of the Cnited Sta.tes of America;

Whereas, the Court not including upon the Bench a Judge of
Swiss nationality, the Swiss Government availed itself of the pro-
visions of Article 31, paragraph 2, of the Statute to choose M. Paul
Carry, Professor of the Law Faculty of the Vniversity of Geneva,
to sit as Judge ad hoc; and whereas the President of the Court,
being a national of one of the Parties to the case, has transferred
6the Presidency for the present case tothe Vice-President in accord-
ance with Article 13, paragraph 1, of the Kules;
Whereas in the course of hearings heldonOctober 12th and qth,

1957, the Court, in accordance with Article 61, paragraph 8, of the
Rules, heard the observations of M. Paul Guggenheim, on behalf
of the Swiss Government, and of the Honorable Loftus Becker and
the Honorable Dallas S. Townsend, on behalf of the Government
of the Cnited States of America;
Whereas by letter of October 16th, 19j7, the Ambassador to the
h'etherlands of the Vnited States of America transmitted the text
of the following telegram which had been addressed to him by the

Department of Justice of the Vnited States of America:
"Chemie Petition granted. Court invites counsel 'to discuss
among other things the power of the District Court to dismiss and
the propriety of the dismissal of petitioner's complaint under Rule
37 (B), for failure to obey its order for prod~ction of documents
issned under Rule 34,in the absence of evidence and of finding that
petitioner "refuses to obey" such order'. Attenhofer and Kaufman
petitions denied."

Whereas in the said letter, a copy of which was the same day
transmitted tothe Co-Agent for the Swiss Government, the Ambas-
sador to the Setherlands of the LTnitedStates of America expressed
the hope that he ~ï,ouldbe able to amplify this information in due
course ;
Whereas by letter of October 18th, 1957, from the Swiss Ambas-
sador to the Xetherlands, the Co-Agent for the Swiss Government
submitted the observation that the communication of the Govern-

ment of the United States of America in no way affected the
conclusions set out under (a), (b) and (c) of the request for the
indication of interim measures of protection, which conclusions
had been confirmed on behalf of the Swiss Government in the
course of the hearings ;
Whereas a copy of the letter from the Swiss Ambassador was
the same day transmitted to the Agent for the Government of the
L7nited States of America;

LVhereasby letter of October ~gth, 1957, the Ambassador to the
Xetherlands of the Vnited States of Americainformed the Registrar
that his Government, through its Agent and its Co-Agent, had
requested him to transmit the following statement :

S. Ton-nseild, for the United States of America, stated as follows:

"Chemie unsuccessfully eshausted its appellate remedies to
the Supreme Court, and when the six months period of grace
had expired, without Chemiemaking the production, the District
Court entered the order and in 1956held that Chemie'scomplaint
7 stood dismissed. Again Chemie appealed unsuccessfully to the
Court of Appeals and in this way attempted to get back into the
case. The Court of Appeals affirmed and now Chemie, in its
second trip to the Supreme Court, is making another effort to
get bacli into the case by petitioning the Supreme Court to review
the decision of the Court of Appeals. This petition is now pending
before the Supreme Court of the United States." (Verbatim
Record, p. 44.)

2. In the afternoon (Washington time) October 14, 1957, many
hours after the adjournment on that day of the sitting of this Court
at 11.39 a.m., the Supreme Court of the United States of America
granted the above-mentioned petition of I.G. Chemie (Interhandel)
to review the decision of the Court of Appeals, by issuing the
follon-ingorder :

"Number 348. Société internationale pour participations
industrielles et commerciales, S. A. Brownell. United States
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit. Certiorari
granted. Counsel are invited to discuss, among other things, the
power of the District Court to dismiss, and the propriety of its
dismissal, of petitioner's complaint, under rule 37 (B) (2) of
F.R.C.P. [Federal Rules of Civil Procedure], for failure to obey
its order, for production of documents, issued under rule 34 of
F.R.C.P. in the absence of evidence and of finding that petitioner

'refuses to obey' such order."

3. The Government of the United States of America wishes to
state expressly that it adheres to its preliminary objection, filed
October II, 1957, and to the reasons given in the arguments of its
agent and CO-agentof October 12 and October 14, 1957, why no
interim measures of protection should be issued with respect to the
sale or disposition of the shares of General Aniline and Film Corpo-
ration. For the information of Court, the Government of the United
States of '4merica is not taking action at the present time to fix a

time schedule for the sale of such shares."

Whereas a copy of the letter from the Ambassador to the Nether-
lands of the United States of America Ras the same day transmitted
to the Co-Agent for the Swiss Government;

W7hereas by a letter dated October ~gth, 1957, and handed in to
the Registry on October 20th the Ambassador of Switzerland to
the Xetherlands transmitted the following communication from
the Co-Agent for the Swiss Government:

"The position of the Swiss Government in regard to this communi-
cation is as follo~vs:
I. The S~vissGovernment takes note of the fact that the Govern-
ment of the United States has informed the International Court
of Justice that it 'is not taking action at the present time to fix
a time schedule for the sale of such shares', that is, the shares of the

8 INTERHANDEL (IST. SIEAS. OF PROTECTIOX) (ORDER 24 X j7) II0

General Aniline and Film Corporation, which, in the opinion of the
Swiss Government, belong to INTERHANDEL.
2. The effect of this declaration is that the sale of the shares is

not imminent, contrary to what the Swiss Government was
entitled to assume n-hen, on October 3rd, 1957, it filed its request
for interim measures of protection. The Swiss Government would,
however, point out that the declaration of the Government of the
United States does not indicate for how long the sale of the shares
will be suspended. Nor does it indicate that this suspension \vil1be
maintained so long as the dispute is pending before the Court. The
Swiss Government would be happy to receive fuller information
from the Government of the United States on this point, to enable it
to appreciate the exact purport of the above-mentioned declaration.
Such information is the more necessary inasmuch as the Govern-
ment of the United States confirms, in its declaration, the attitude

adopted by its representatives before the Court, to the effect that
it is for the United States to decide nhat matters fa11within its
domestic jurisdiction. As a consequence, the American Government
has maintained its decision to include within this exclusive juris-
diction the right to proceed to a sale oi the shaies.

3. Lastly, the Smiss Government ventures to recall to the Court
and to the Government of the United States that its request for
interim measures of protection was presented not only for the

purpose of preventing the danger of an imminent sale of the shares
of the General Aniline and Film Corporation. As appears from the
request itself, and from the statements of the Swiss Co-Agent at
the sitting of the Court on October ~ath, 1957,the request is designed
in general to ensure the execution of the subsequent decision of the
Court, should that decision be in favour of Switzerland.
4. The Swiss Government, having received direct communication
from the Government of the United States of the declaration

addressed to the Court, which is set out in the Registrar's letter
of October ~gth, 1957, the Federal Political Departmenthas thought
it proper similarly to communicate the foregoing to the Government
of the United States."

Whereas a copy of the above communication was on Octo-
ber zoth, 1957, transmitted to the Agent for the Government of
the United States;
Whereas Switzerland and the United States of America have,

by Declarations made on their behalf, accepted the compulsory
jurisdiction of the Court on the basis of Article 36, paragraph 2, of
the Statute;

Whereas by its subject-matter the present dispute falls within
the purview of that paragraph ;
JVhereas the Government of the Cnited States of America has

invoked, against the request for the indication of interim measures
of protection, the reservation by which it excluded from its Decla-
ration matters essentially within its doinestic jurisdiction as deter-mined by the United States and whereas the Government accord-
ingly "respectfully declines ...to submit the matter of the sale
or disposition of such shares to the jurisdiction of the Court" ;

Whereas at the hearing the Co-Agent of the Swiss Government
challenged this reservation, on a number of grounds, and stated
that, in its examination of a request for the indication of interim
measures of protection, the Court would not wish to adjudicate
"upon so complex and delicate a question as the validity of the
American reservation" ;
Whereas the procedure applicable to requests for the indication
of interim measures of protection is dealt with in the Rules of
Court by provisions which are laid down in Article 61 and which

appear, along with other procedures, in the section entitled:
"Occasional Rules" ;
Whereas the examination of the contention of the Government
of the United States requires the application of a different procedure,
the procedure laid down in Article 62 of the Rules of Court, and
whereas, if this contention is maintained, it will fa11to be dealt with
by the Court in due course in accordance ,with that procedure;

Whereas the request for the indication of interim measures of
protection must accordingly be examined in conformity with the
procedure laid down in Article 61;
\tThereas, finally, the decision given under this procedure in no
way prejudges the question of the jurisdiction of the Court to deal
with the merits of the case and leaves unaffected the right of the
Respondent to submit arguments against such jurisdiction;

Whereas the Swiss Government, by its request of October 3rd
for the indication by the Court "of the interim measures of protec-
tion which should be taken in order to safeguard the rights of the
Swiss Federal Government" purported to submit its request "in
conformitÿ with Article 41 of the Statute and Article 61 of the Rules
of Court" ;

iIThereas the Court, in order to decide what action should be
taken in pursuance of the request, must, in accordance with -Arti-
cle 41 of the Statute, ascertain what is required bl- the circum-
stances to preserve the respective rights of the Parties pending the
decision of the Court;
\Vhereas, of the three points set forth in the submissions of
Switzerland with regard to its rcclucst for the indication of interim
measures of protection, the second isthe onlj-one which is forrnulated
in terms fulfilling the requirement laid down in Article 61, para-
graph 1, of the Rules and n-hich relates to the conccrn of the Court

to preserve the rigfits which may hc subsequent1~-adjudgcd 11'-the
Court to bclong either to th? -2l)plicant or tu tht~ Res~~ondcilt; Whereas, accordingly, the Court must direct its attention to this
point, namely, the request to the Government of the tTnited States
not to sel1the shares of the General Aniline and Film Corporation
claimed by the Suriss Government as the property of its nationals,
so long as the proceedings in this dispute are pending;

Whereas in the light of the information furnished to the Court,

it appears that, according to the law of the Gnited States, the sale
df those shares can onl~7be effected after termination of a judicial
proceeding which is at present pending in that country in respect
of which there is no indication as to its speedy conclusion, and
whereas such a sale is therefore conditional upon a judicial decision
rejecting the claims of Interhandel;
Whereas, on the other hand, in the statement of the views of the
Government of the United States transmitted to the Court on
October ~gth, 1957, it is said that thatGovernment "is not taking
action at the present time to fix a time schedule for the sale of such
shares" ;

Whereas in the premises it does not appear to the Court that the
circumstances require the indication of the provisional measures
envisaged in the request of the Swiss Federal Government ;

For these reasons,

finds that there is no need to indicate interim measures of
protection.

Done in French and English, the French text being authoritative,
at the Peace Palace, The Hague, this twenty-fourth day of October,
one thousand nine hundred and fifty-seven, in three copies, one of
which will be placed in the archives of the Court and the others
transmitted to the Government of the Swiss Confederation and the
Government of the United States of America, respectively.

fsigned) A. B.~D.~wI,
Vice-President.

/Signed) J. LOPEZ OLIVAX,
Registrar. Judge KLAESTADappends to the Order a statement of his
separate opinion, in which President HACKWORTa Hnd Judge READ
concur.

Judge SirHersch LAUTERPACa pTpends tothe Order a statement
of his separate opinion.

Judge WELLINGTON KOOmakes the following declaration:

1 agree with the decision of the Court not to indicate provi-
sional measures in the case, but regret that 1 do not share
the reasons upon which it is based. In my view, the Court has
no jurisdiction todeal with the request for such measures. The
Government of the United States raised an objection based
upon Proviso (b) of its Declaration of August 14th, 1946,
accepting the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court under
paragraph (2)of Article 36 of the Statute. Proviso (b) states
that the Declaration shall not apply to "...(b) disputes with
regard to matters which are essentially within the domestic
jurisdiction of the Cnited States of America as determined by

the United States of America".

Although the objection was raised by the United States in
the form of a Preliminary Objection, under Article 62 of the
Rules of Court, to the proceedings instituted by the Swiss
Government's Application of October ~st, 1957, "in so far as
that Application relates to the sale or other disposition of the
shares of General Aniline and Film Corporation now held by
the United States Government", it was, in fact, an objection
directed against the Court's jurisdiction to indicate provisional
measures, requested by the Swiss Government on October 3rd,
1957. This was made clear by the Agent of the L7nited States
in his observations at the proceedings held on October 12th

and ~qth, 1957, under paragraph 8 of Article 61 of the Rules
of Court, when he urged that Proviso (b) to the United States'
Declaration of Acceptance excluded the Court's jurisdiction
in the matter of the sale or other disposition of the shares of
the General Aniline and Film Corporation-a matter which
the United States had determined to be essentially within its
domestic jurisdiction in exercise of its reserved right under
Proviso (b) .

1consider that this objection is well founded, that the Court
is not competent to deal with the Swiss request for indication
of provisional measures and that its decision should be based

upon this ground. The reason of lack of urgency is a true
circumstance, but the placing of its decision on this ground
carries an implication that the Court considers the said Pro-
12 vis0 (b) to the ù'nited States' Declaration is not applicable
to the matter of provisional measures, whereas, in my view,
it is applicable.

Judge KOJEVNIKO dVeclares that he is unable to agree with the
Order.

Bilingual Content

COUR INTERNATIONALE DE JUSTICE

RECUEIL DES ARRÊTS,

AVIS CONSULTATIFS ET ORDONNANCES

AFFAIRE DE L'INTERHANDEE

(SUISSC.ÉTATS-UNISD'AMÉRIQUE)

DEMANDE EN INDICATION
DE MESURES CONSERVATOIRES

ORDONNANCE DU 24 OCTOBRE 1957

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

REPORTS OF JUDGMENTS,
ADVISORY OPINIONS AND ORDERS

INTERHANDEL CASE

(SWITZERLANDv.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA)

REQUEST FOR THE INDICATION
OF INTERIM MEASURES OF PROTECTION

ORDEROF OCTOBER 24th, 1957 La présente ordonnance doit êtrecitée comme suit:
((Aflaire de Z'InterhandeZ(mesures conservatoires),

Ordonnance du 24 octobre1957: C. I. J.Recueil 1957,p. 105. »

This Order should be cited as follows :

"Interhandel Case (interim measures of protection),
Order of Octoberzgth,1957: I.C.J. Reports 1957,p. 105.''

NO de vente :
Sales number 169 / CO'C'RINTERSAIFIONALE DE JLSTICE

1957
Le 24octobre
Rôle général
no 34

24 octobre 1957

AFFAIRE DE L'INTERHANDEL

(SUISSE c. ÉTATS-VXIS D'AMÉRIQTJE)

DEMANDE EX IKDICATIOS

DE MESURES COSSERVATOIRES

Présents: M. B.4Daw1, Vice-Présidentjais~~ztjo?zctide P~ésidelzt

en l'aflai;eM. H-XCKWORTP Hv,éstde;tMlI. GUERRERO,
B.~sDEv.~~T, \~ISI.~RSKI, ZORICIC, KLAESTAD,READ,
A~1\1.44~-GO';, KOJET~SIKOV, Sir hfuhammad ZAFRULLA
KHAS, Sir Hersch L.~UTERP.XCH MTM. MORESOQUIS-

~aij.4,C6RDov.4, ~~ELLISGTOS I<oo, Jzrges; 11. Paul
CARRY,Juge ad hoc; 11. LOPEZOLIVXS,Grefier.

ainsi composée,

après délibéréen Chambre du Conseil,
vu les articles1 et 48 du Statut de la Cour,

vu l'article 61 du Règlement de la Cour,

vu la requêteintroductive d'instancde la Confédérationsuisse,
datée du I~~octobre1957 et remise au Greffier2eoctobre, soumet-
tant à la Cour un différend entre la Confédérationsuisse et les
Etats-Unis d'Amérique, requêtepar laquelle la Cour est priée de INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

October z4tk
General List
YEAR 1937 No. 34

Octoberqth, 1957

INTERHANDEL CASE

(SIVITZERLAKD v.USITED ST,4TES OF -4MERICA)

REQUEST FOR THE IXDICATIOS

OF ISTERIJI MEASURES OF PROTECTIOS

Present: Vice-PresidentB.-~DAw,ictingPreside;President HACK-
WORTH ; Jz~dges GÇERRERO, BASDEYAST,\VISIARSKI,
ZORICIC, KL- EST AD,READ, AR~I.-~sD-UGO';,KOJEV-

SIKOT~,Sir Muhammad ZAFRULLAKHAX, Sir Hersch
LAUTERPACHT JI,ORESOQI-IXTATAC , OR DOT.^^, LLIXG-
TON KOO; M. Paul CARRY,J~tdge ad hoc; Registrar
LOPEZOLIY~S.

composed as above,

after deliberation,
having regard to Articl41 and 48of the Statute of the Court,

having regard toArticle61 of the Rules of Court,
having regard to the Application, dated Octo~st, Igj7, and
handed to the Registrar on October znd, instituting proceedings
by the Swiss Confederation and submitting to the Court a dispute
between the Swiss Confederation and theted States of America,

in which the Court is asked:
4 ((Dire et j~~ger,tant en présence qii'en l'absence dudit Gouver-
nement [des Etats-Unis d'Amérique],après avoir examinéles thèses
des Parties,
I. que le Gouvernement des États-unis d'Amérique esttenu de
restituer les avoirs de la Sociétéinternationale pour parti-
cipations industrielles et commerciales S. A. (Interhandel) à
cette société;
2. subsidiairement que le différend est de nature à êtresoumis
à la juridiction, à l'arbitrage ou à la conciliation dans les
conditions qu'il appartiendra à la Cour de déterminer. ))

Vu la lettre du 3 octobre 1957, remise au Greffier le mêmejour,
par laquelle l'agent du Gouvernement suisse, dont la désignation
avait éténotifiée par la requête introductive d'instance, demande
à la Cour, en se référant aux articles 41 du Statut et 61 du
Règlement relatifs à l'indication de mesures conservatoires:

« de bien vouloir indiquer qu'en attendant la décision définitive
en l'instance introduite par Ia requêteen date du I~~ octobre,
a. Le Gomrerileme~ltdes États-Unis d'Amérique estinvité à ne se
dessaisir par aucune mesure législative, judiciaire, adminis-
trative ou exécutive des biens qui sont réclaméscomme propriét4
suisse dans les conclusions de la requêteintroductive d'instance
siiissedu IC~octobre, tant que la procédurerelative à ce différend
est pendante devant la Cour internationale de Justice.

O. En particulier, le Gouvernement des États-unis est invité à
ne pas procéder à la vente des actions de la (General Aniline
and Film Corporation revendiquées par le Gouvernement
fédéralsuisse comme propriétéde ses ressortissants, tant que la
procédure relative à ce différend est pendante.
c. En général,le couvernement des États-unis doit faire en sorte
que nulle mesure quelco~~quene soit prise de nature à porter
préjudice au droit de la Suisse à l'exécution del'arrêtque la
Cour rendra soit sur le foncl,soit sur la conclusion siibsidiair1,

Rend l'ordonnance suivante :
Considérant que, le 2 octobre I9j7, le Gouvernement des États-
Unis d'Amérique a étéavisé par la voie télégraphique du dépôt
de la requête introductive d'instance dont une copie lui a en même

temps été transmise par lettre; et que, le 3 octobre 1957, les
conclusions énoncées dans la demande en indication de mesures
conservatoires lui ont étécommuniquées par la voie télégraphique,
le texte de cette demande lui ayant été transmis en mêmetemps
par lettre;
Considérant que la demande en indication de mesures conser-

vatoires a éténotifiée au Secrétaire général des Nations Vnies
avec une référence à l'article 41, paragraphe 2, du Statut;
5 "To adjudge and declare, whether the Government of the United
States of America appears or not, after considering the contentions
of the Parties,
I. that the Government of the United States of America is
under an obligation to restore the assets of the Société inter-
nationale pour participationsindztstrielleset conzmerciales.A.
(Interhandel) to that Company;
2.in the alternative, that the dispute is one which is fit for
submission for judicial settlement, arbitration or conciliation
under the conditions which it will be for the Court to deter-
mine."

Having regard to the letter dated October 3rd, 1957, and handed
to the Registrar on that day, in which the Agent for the Swiss
Government, whose appointment had been notified in the Appli-
.cation instituting proceedings, referred.to Article 41 of the Statute
and Article 61 of the Rules, relating to the indication of provisional
measures, and asked the Court:

"pending a final decision in the proceedings instituted by the
-1pplication of October ~st, to indicate the following measures:
(a) The Government of the United States of America is requested
to take no legislative, judicial, administrative or executive
step to part xvith the property which is claimed to be Swiss
property in the submissions of the S\vissApplication of Octo-
ber 1st instituting proceedings, so long as the case conceming
this dispute is pending before the International Court of Justice.
(b) In particular, the Government of the United States is requested
not to sel1the shares of the General Aniline and Film Corporation
claimed by the Swiss Fecleral Government as the property of
its nationals, so long as the proceedings in this dispute are
pending.
(c) In general, the Government of the United States should so
act that no measure whatever is taken which would prejudice
the right of Switzerland to execution of the judgment which
the Court will deliver, either on the merits or on the alternative
submission."

Makes the jollowing Order :

Whereas the Government of the United States of America was,
on October znd, 1957, notified by telegram of the filing of the
Alpplication instituting proceedings, of which a copy was at the
same time transmitted to it by letter; and whereas the submissions
set forth in the request for the indication of interim measures of
protection were, on October 3rd, 1957, conimunicated to that
Government, the text of the request being at the same time trans-
mitted to it by letter;
1Vhereas the request for the indication of interim measures of

protection was notified to the Secretary-General of the United
Nations with a reference to Article 41, paragraph 2, of the Statute;
5 Considérant que, le 8 octobre 1957, le Gouvernement suisse, en
19 personne du CO-agent désignépar lui, et le Gouvernement des
Etats-Cnis d'Amérique, en la personne du secrétaire d'Etat, ont
étéavisés que la Cour tiendrait audience le 12 octobre 1957 pour
entendre les Parties en leurs observations au sujet de la demande
en indication de mesures conservatoires;

Vu la lettre du g octobre 1957 par laquelle l'ambassadeur des
États-Cnis d'Amérique aux Pays-Bas a notifié la désignation par
son Gouvernement d'un agent et d'un CO-agent en l'affaire;

Vu la lettre du IO octobre 1957 par laquelle l'ambassadeur des
États-~nis d'Amérique aux Pays-Bas a informé le Greffier de
l'intention de son Gouvernement de soulever une exception préli-

minaire relative à l'instance introduite devant la Cour par le
Gouvernement suisse, ajoutant que cette exception serait déposée
au Greffe par les agents des Etats-Cnis d'Amérique le II octobre
dans les termes suivants:

((Exception préliminaire desÉtats-unis d'Amérique:

Le Gouvernement des États-unis d'Amérique,par l'intermédiaire
de ses CO-agentsLoftus Beclter et Dallas S. Townsend, déposepar
la présenteune exception préliminaire, aux termes de l'articl62 du
Règlement de la Cour, dans l'instance introduite par le Gouverne-
ment de la Suisse en l'affaire de l'Interhande1, par requête du
vente ou aux autres mesures de disposition des actions de la General
Aniline and Film Corporation actuellement détenues par le Gouver-
nement des Etats-Unis. Le Gouvernement des Etats-Unis a décidé
que la vente ou la disposition des actions de la Société américaine,
dont le titre de propriété estdétenu par le Gouvernement des Etats-
Unis dans l'exercice de son autorité souveraine, est une question
qui relève essentiellement de sa compétence nationale. En consé-
quence, en application du paragraphe b) des conditions attachées
à l'acceptation par ce pays de la juridiction obligatoire de la Cour
en date du 14 août 1946, ce pays refuse respectueusement, sans
préjudice de toutes autres exceptions préliminaires qu'il pourrait
soulever, de soumettre à la comp4tence de la Cour la question de
la vente ou de la disposition desdites actions))

Considérant que le IO octobre 1957, copie du texte précité a
étéremise au CO-agent du Gouvernement suisse, et que, leII octo-
bre, ledit texte a étéconfirmé sous la signature des CO-agents du
Gouvernement des Etats-Vnis d'Amérique;

Considérant que, la Cour ne comptant pas sur le siège de juge
de nationalité suisse, le Gouvernement suisse s'est prévalu de
l'article 31, paragraphe 2, du Statut et a désignépour siéger en
qualité de juge ad hoc M. Paul Carry, professeur à la faculté de
droit de l'université de Gènève; et que le Président de la Cour
se trouvant être le ressortissant d'une des Parties en cause a, Whereas on October Bth, 1957, the Swiss Government, through
the Co-Agent appointed by it, and the Government of the Cnited
States of America, through the Secretary of State, were notified
that the Court would sit on October ~zth, 1957, to hear the obser-

vations of the Parties on the request for the indication of interim
measures of protection;
Having regard to the letter of October gth, 1957, by which the
Ambassador to the Netherlands of the Cnited States of America
notified the appointment by his Government of an Agent and a
Co-Agent for the case;

Having regard to the letter of October ~oth, 1957, by which the
Ambassador to the Netherlands of the Cnited States of America
informed the Registrar of the intention of his Government to
raise a preliminary objection in connection with the proceedings
instituted before the Court by the Government of Switzerland and
adding that this objection would be filed in the Registry by the
Agents for the LTnited States of America on October 11th in the
following terms :

"Prelimiilary objection of the United States of America:
The Goverilment of the United States of America, through its
Co-Agents Loftus Becker and Dallas S. Towrnsend,herewith files a
prelinlinary objection under Article62 of the Rules of the Court,
to the proceecliiigs instituteby the Governrnent of Switzerland
in the Interhandel case by its application of October I, 1957, in
so far as that application relates to the sale or other disposition of
the shares of General Aniline and Film Corporation non held b~.
the United States Government. The United States Government
has determined that such sale or disposition of the shares in the
American corporation, title to which is held by the United States
Government in the exercise of its sovereign authority, is a matter
essentially xrithin its domestic jurisdiction. Accordingly, pursuant
to paragraph (b)of the conditions attached to this Coiintry'saccep-
1910, this country respectfiilly declines, \rithout prejudice to other
and fiirther preliminar~.objections \\.hich it map file, to submit the
matter of the sale or dispositib:l of siich shares to the jiirisdiction
of the Coiirt."

\Vhereas on October ~oth, 1957, a cop3- of the above text was
communicated to the Co-Agent for the Swiss Government, and
whereas that text was confirmed and signed by the Co-Agents for
the Government of the Cnited Sta.tes of America;

Whereas, the Court not including upon the Bench a Judge of
Swiss nationality, the Swiss Government availed itself of the pro-
visions of Article 31, paragraph 2, of the Statute to choose M. Paul
Carry, Professor of the Law Faculty of the Vniversity of Geneva,
to sit as Judge ad hoc; and whereas the President of the Court,
being a national of one of the Parties to the case, has transferred
6pour la présente affaire, cédé la présidence au Vice-Président,
conformément à l'article 13, paragraphe 1, du Règlement;

Considérant qu'au cours des audiences tenues les 12 et 14 octobre
1957, la Cour, en application de l'article 61, paragraphe 8, du
Règlement, a entendu, en leurs observations, M. Paul Guggenheim,
au nom du Gouvernement suisse, et MM. Loftus Becker et Dallas
S. Townsend, au nom du Gouvernement des Etats-Unis d'Amé-

rique ;
Considérant que, par lettre du 16 octobre 1957, l'ambassadeur
des Etats-Unis d'Amérique aux Pays-Bas a communiqué le texte
du télégrammeci-après, qui lui avait étéadressépar le département
de la Justice des Etats-Lnis d'Amérique:

((Pétition Chemie acceptée.La Cour invite conseils ((à discuter
((entre autres choses si la District Courtétait fondée à débouterle
(pétitionnaire de sa réclamation, par application de la règle37(R),
(en donnant comme motif qu'il n'a pas obéi àl'ordonnance pres-
(crivant de produire des documents, rendue en application de la
(règle 34, nonobstant l'absence de preuves et de constatation que
(le pétitionnaire ait ((refuséd'obéir ))à l'ordonnance D. Pétitions
Attenhofer et Kaufman rejetées. 1)

Considérant que dans cette lettre, dont copie a ététransmise le
même jour au CO-agent du Gouvernement suisse, l'ambassadeur
des Etats-Unis d'Amérique aux Pays-Bas énonçait l'espoir de

pouvoir développer cette information, le moment venu ;

Considérant que, par lettre du 18 octobre 1957 de l'ambassadeur
de Suisse aux Pays-Bas, le CO-agent du Gouvernement suisse a
fait part de la remarque que.la communication du Gouvernement

des Etats-Unis d'Amérique n'affectait en aucune manière les
conclusions a), b) et c) de la demande en indication de mesures
conservatoires, conclusions qui ont étéconfirmées au nom du
Gouvernement suisse au cours des audiences;

Considérant que, le même jour, copie de la lettre de l'ambassa-
deur de Suisse a ététransmise à l'agent du Gouvernement des
Etats-Unis d'Amérique ;
Considérant que, par lettre du 19 octobre 1957, l'ambassadeur

des Etats-Unis d'Amérique aux Pays-Bas a informé le Greffier que
son Gouvernement, par l'entremise de son agent et de son CO-agent,
l'avait chargé de lui transmettre l'exposé ci-après :
I. A l'audience publique du 12 octobre 1957, le CO-agentDallas
S. Townsend a, pour les Etats-Unis d'Amérique, déclaré ce qui suit:

(IAJIG. . Chemiea épuisé sans succèstous ses moyens de recours
devant la Cour suprêmeet, après expiration des six mois de grâce
accordéssans que la sociétéen cause ait fourni les documents
demandés, laDistrict Courta enregistré l'ordonnance et en 1956the Presidency for the present case tothe Vice-President in accord-
ance with Article 13, paragraph 1, of the Kules;
Whereas in the course of hearings heldonOctober 12th and qth,

1957, the Court, in accordance with Article 61, paragraph 8, of the
Rules, heard the observations of M. Paul Guggenheim, on behalf
of the Swiss Government, and of the Honorable Loftus Becker and
the Honorable Dallas S. Townsend, on behalf of the Government
of the Cnited States of America;
Whereas by letter of October 16th, 19j7, the Ambassador to the
h'etherlands of the Vnited States of America transmitted the text
of the following telegram which had been addressed to him by the

Department of Justice of the Vnited States of America:
"Chemie Petition granted. Court invites counsel 'to discuss
among other things the power of the District Court to dismiss and
the propriety of the dismissal of petitioner's complaint under Rule
37 (B), for failure to obey its order for prod~ction of documents
issned under Rule 34,in the absence of evidence and of finding that
petitioner "refuses to obey" such order'. Attenhofer and Kaufman
petitions denied."

Whereas in the said letter, a copy of which was the same day
transmitted tothe Co-Agent for the Swiss Government, the Ambas-
sador to the Setherlands of the LTnitedStates of America expressed
the hope that he ~ï,ouldbe able to amplify this information in due
course ;
Whereas by letter of October 18th, 1957, from the Swiss Ambas-
sador to the Xetherlands, the Co-Agent for the Swiss Government
submitted the observation that the communication of the Govern-

ment of the United States of America in no way affected the
conclusions set out under (a), (b) and (c) of the request for the
indication of interim measures of protection, which conclusions
had been confirmed on behalf of the Swiss Government in the
course of the hearings ;
Whereas a copy of the letter from the Swiss Ambassador was
the same day transmitted to the Agent for the Government of the
L7nited States of America;

LVhereasby letter of October ~gth, 1957, the Ambassador to the
Xetherlands of the Vnited States of Americainformed the Registrar
that his Government, through its Agent and its Co-Agent, had
requested him to transmit the following statement :

S. Ton-nseild, for the United States of America, stated as follows:

"Chemie unsuccessfully eshausted its appellate remedies to
the Supreme Court, and when the six months period of grace
had expired, without Chemiemaking the production, the District
Court entered the order and in 1956held that Chemie'scomplaint
7 déclarétenir 1'1.G. Chemie pour déboutéede son action. Cette
sociétéintroduisit un nouveau recours sans succès devant la
Court of Appeals, essayant ainsi de rouvrir la procédure. La
Court of Appeals a confirmé le jugement et 1'1. G. Chemie fait
maintenant un nouvel effort pour rouvrir l'instance en la soumet-
tant à la Cour suprême, devant laquelle elle se présente une
seconde fois, en demandant la revision de la décisionde la Courf

of Appeals. Cette demande est actuellement pendante devant la
Cour suprême. ))(Compte rendu 57/26, p. 51 de la traduction.)
2. Dans l'après-midi du 14 octobre 1957 (heure de Washington),
plusieurs heures après la clôture de l'audience de la Cour pour ce

jour là, àII heures 39, la Cour suprême desEtats-Unis d'Amérique
a admis la pétition mentionnée ci-dessus de 1'1.G. Chemie (Inter-
handel) tendant à obtenir revision de la décisionde la Cour d'appel,
en rendant l'ordonnance suivante :
«Xuméro 348. Sociétéinternationale pour participations indus-

t~ielles et commerciales, S. A. Brownell. Court of Appeals des
Etats-Unis pour le circuit du District de Columbia. Certiorari
accordé. Les conseils sont invités à discuter entre autres choses
si la District Court était fondée à débouter les pétitionnaires de
leur réclamation, par application de la règle 37 (B) (2) des
F. R. C.P. [Federal rztle~of Ci;il procedz4rej,en donnant comme
motif qu'ils n'ont pas obéià son ordonnance leur prescrivant de
produire des documents, rendue en application de la règle 34
des F. R. C. P.,nonobstant l'absence de preuves et de constata-
tion que le pétitionnaire ait (refusé d'obéir » à l'ordonnance. i,

3. Le Gouvernement des États-unis d'Amérique désire déclarer
expressément qu'il maintient l'exception préliminaire qu'il a
déposée le II octobre 1957 et les motifs invoqués en plaidoirie par
son agent et son CO-agentle 12 et le14 octobre 1957, afin d'expliquer
pourquoi il ne devrait être indiqué aucune mesure conservatoire
concernant la vente ou la disposition des actions de la General
Aniline and Film Corppration. A titre d'information pour la Cour,
le Gouvernement des Etats-Unis d'Amérique n'a pas l'intention,
pour le moment, de prendre des mesures en vue de fixer des délais

pour la vente de ces actions. 11

Considérant que, le même jour, copie de la lettre de l'ambassa-
deur des Etats-Unis d'Amérique aux Pays-Bas a ététransmise au
CO-agent du Gouvernement suisse;

Considérant que, par lettre du 19 octobre 1957, remise au Greffe
le 20 octobre, l'ambassadeur de Suisse aux Pays-Bas a fait de la
part du CO-agent du Gouvernement suisse la communication
ci-après :

I(La position du Gouvernement suisse à l'égarddecette communi-
cation est la suivante:
I. Le GoFuvernement suisse prend acte du fait que le Gouverne-
ment des Etats-Unis a informé la Cour internationale de Justice

qu'il« is not taking action at the present time to fix a time schedule.
for the sale of such shares »,donc les actions de la General Aniline.
8 stood dismissed. Again Chemie appealed unsuccessfully to the
Court of Appeals and in this way attempted to get back into the
case. The Court of Appeals affirmed and now Chemie, in its
second trip to the Supreme Court, is making another effort to
get bacli into the case by petitioning the Supreme Court to review
the decision of the Court of Appeals. This petition is now pending
before the Supreme Court of the United States." (Verbatim
Record, p. 44.)

2. In the afternoon (Washington time) October 14, 1957, many
hours after the adjournment on that day of the sitting of this Court
at 11.39 a.m., the Supreme Court of the United States of America
granted the above-mentioned petition of I.G. Chemie (Interhandel)
to review the decision of the Court of Appeals, by issuing the
follon-ingorder :

"Number 348. Société internationale pour participations
industrielles et commerciales, S. A. Brownell. United States
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit. Certiorari
granted. Counsel are invited to discuss, among other things, the
power of the District Court to dismiss, and the propriety of its
dismissal, of petitioner's complaint, under rule 37 (B) (2) of
F.R.C.P. [Federal Rules of Civil Procedure], for failure to obey
its order, for production of documents, issued under rule 34 of
F.R.C.P. in the absence of evidence and of finding that petitioner

'refuses to obey' such order."

3. The Government of the United States of America wishes to
state expressly that it adheres to its preliminary objection, filed
October II, 1957, and to the reasons given in the arguments of its
agent and CO-agentof October 12 and October 14, 1957, why no
interim measures of protection should be issued with respect to the
sale or disposition of the shares of General Aniline and Film Corpo-
ration. For the information of Court, the Government of the United
States of '4merica is not taking action at the present time to fix a

time schedule for the sale of such shares."

Whereas a copy of the letter from the Ambassador to the Nether-
lands of the United States of America Ras the same day transmitted
to the Co-Agent for the Swiss Government;

W7hereas by a letter dated October ~gth, 1957, and handed in to
the Registry on October 20th the Ambassador of Switzerland to
the Xetherlands transmitted the following communication from
the Co-Agent for the Swiss Government:

"The position of the Swiss Government in regard to this communi-
cation is as follo~vs:
I. The S~vissGovernment takes note of the fact that the Govern-
ment of the United States has informed the International Court
of Justice that it 'is not taking action at the present time to fix
a time schedule for the sale of such shares', that is, the shares of the

8 and Film Corporation, lesquelles, de l'avis du Gouvernement suisse,
appartiennent à INTERHAXDEL.

2. Cette déclaration a pour conséquence que la vente des actions
n'est pas imminente, contrairement à ce que le Gouvernement
suisse était en droit de supposer lorsqu'il a déposé,le 3 octobrI9j7,
sa demande en indication de mesures conservatoires. Toutefois, le
Gouvernement suissp se permet d'observer que la déclaration du
Gouvernement des Etats-Unis n'indique pas jusqu'à quel moment
la vente des actions est suspendue. Il n'indique pas davantage que
cette suspension sera maintenue tant que le différend est pendant
devant la Cour. Le Gouvernement suisse serait heureux d'obtenir
à ce sujet de plus amples informations de la part du Gouvernement
des Etats-Unis afin de pouvoir se rendre compte de la portée exacte
de la déclaration susmentionnée. Ces renseigne-ment sont d'autant
plus importants que le Gouvernement des Etats-Unis confirme,

dans sa déclaration, l'attitude adoptée par ses représentants devant
la Cour, attitude selon laquelle il appartient aux Etats-Unis de
décider quelles questions relèvent de leur compétence nationale.
En conséquence,le Gouveriiement américain a maintenu sa décision
de faire figurer dans cette compétence exclusive le droit de procéder
à la vente des actions.
3. Enfin, le Gouvernement suiss~se permet de rappeler à la Cour,
ainsi qu'au Gouvernement des Etats-Unis, que sa demande de
mesures conservatoires n'a pas seulement étéprésentéeen vue de
prévenir le danger d'une vente prochaine des actions de la General

Aniline and Film Corporation. Comme il ressort de la demande elle-
même, ainsi que des déclarations du CO-agentsuisse à l'audience de
la Cour du 12 octobre 1957, cette demande tend, d'une manière
générale,à assurer l'exécution de la future décisionde la Cour pour
le cas où cette dernière serait favorable à la Suisse.
4. Le Gouvernement ,suisse ayant de son côté reçu directement
du Gouvernement des Etats-Unis la déclaration qu'il a adressée à
la Cour et qui est reproduite dans la lettre du Greffier d19 octobre
1957, le Département politique fédéral a tenu à-communiquer ce
qui précède,également, au Gouvernement des Etats-Unis. 1)

Considérant que copie de cette communication a ététransmise
à l'agent du Gouvernement des Etats-Unis d'Amérique le 20 octobre
1957;

Considérant que la Suisse et les États-unis d'Amérique ont
accepté par les déclarations souscrites en leur nom la juridiction
obligatoire de la Cour sur la base de l'article 36, paragraphe 2,
du Statut;

Considérant que par son objet le présent différend tombe sous
l'application dudit paragraphe ;
Considérant que le Gouvernement des États-~nis d'Amérique a

opposé à la demande en indication de mesures conservatoires la
réserve par laquelle il a exclu de sa déclaration les questions
relevant essentiellement de sa compétence nationale telle qu'elle INTERHANDEL (IST. SIEAS. OF PROTECTIOX) (ORDER 24 X j7) II0

General Aniline and Film Corporation, which, in the opinion of the
Swiss Government, belong to INTERHANDEL.
2. The effect of this declaration is that the sale of the shares is

not imminent, contrary to what the Swiss Government was
entitled to assume n-hen, on October 3rd, 1957, it filed its request
for interim measures of protection. The Swiss Government would,
however, point out that the declaration of the Government of the
United States does not indicate for how long the sale of the shares
will be suspended. Nor does it indicate that this suspension \vil1be
maintained so long as the dispute is pending before the Court. The
Swiss Government would be happy to receive fuller information
from the Government of the United States on this point, to enable it
to appreciate the exact purport of the above-mentioned declaration.
Such information is the more necessary inasmuch as the Govern-
ment of the United States confirms, in its declaration, the attitude

adopted by its representatives before the Court, to the effect that
it is for the United States to decide nhat matters fa11within its
domestic jurisdiction. As a consequence, the American Government
has maintained its decision to include within this exclusive juris-
diction the right to proceed to a sale oi the shaies.

3. Lastly, the Smiss Government ventures to recall to the Court
and to the Government of the United States that its request for
interim measures of protection was presented not only for the

purpose of preventing the danger of an imminent sale of the shares
of the General Aniline and Film Corporation. As appears from the
request itself, and from the statements of the Swiss Co-Agent at
the sitting of the Court on October ~ath, 1957,the request is designed
in general to ensure the execution of the subsequent decision of the
Court, should that decision be in favour of Switzerland.
4. The Swiss Government, having received direct communication
from the Government of the United States of the declaration

addressed to the Court, which is set out in the Registrar's letter
of October ~gth, 1957, the Federal Political Departmenthas thought
it proper similarly to communicate the foregoing to the Government
of the United States."

Whereas a copy of the above communication was on Octo-
ber zoth, 1957, transmitted to the Agent for the Government of
the United States;
Whereas Switzerland and the United States of America have,

by Declarations made on their behalf, accepted the compulsory
jurisdiction of the Court on the basis of Article 36, paragraph 2, of
the Statute;

Whereas by its subject-matter the present dispute falls within
the purview of that paragraph ;
JVhereas the Government of the Cnited States of America has

invoked, against the request for the indication of interim measures
of protection, the reservation by which it excluded from its Decla-
ration matters essentially within its doinestic jurisdiction as deter-est fixéepar les État~-~nis et qu'en conséquence Kil refuse respec-
tueusement ..de soumettre à la compétence de la Cour la question
de la vente ou de la disposition des actions de ladite société 1);
Considérant qu'à l'audience, le CO-agentdu Gouvernement suisse

a contesté cette réserve pour divers motifs et qu'il a énoncéque,
dans l'examen d'une demande en indication de mesures conser-
vatoires, la Cour ne voudrait pas se prononcer ((sur une question
aussi complexe et délicateque la validité de la réserveaméricaine 1);

Considérant que la procédure applicable aux demandes en indi-
cation de mesures conservatoires fait l'objet dans le Règlement
de la Cour de dispositions énoncéesdans l'article 61 et figurant,
ainsi que d'autres procédures, sous la rubrique: (Règles parti-
culières »;

Considérant que l'examen du moyen soulevé par le Gouverne-
ment des Etats-Vnis d'Amérique exige l'emploi d'une procédure
différente, celle qui est déterminée par l'article 62 du Règlement,
et que, si ce moyen est maintenu, celui-ci devra, le moment venu,
êtreexaminé par'la Cour conformément à cette procédure;

Considérant que la demande en indication de mesures conser-
vatoires doit en conséquence être examinée conformément à la
procédure fixéepar l'article 61;
Considérant enfin que la décision rendue à la suite de cette

procédure ne préjuge en rien la question de la compétence de la
Cour pour connaître au fond de l'affaire et laisse intact le droit
du défendeur de faire valoir ses moyens pour contester cette
compétence ;
Considérant que le Gouvernement suisse, par sa demande pré-
sentéele 3 octobre tendant à faire indiquer par la Cour ((les mesures

conservatoires qui devraient êtreprises pour sauvegarder les droits
du Gouvernement fédéral suisse », a entendu soumettre cette
demande Iconformément à l'article 41 du Statut et à l'article 61
du Règlement );
Considérant que la Cour, pour déterminer la suite à donner à

cette demande, doit, conformément à l'article 41 du Statut, appré-
cier ce que les circonstances exigent pour sauvegarder les droits
de chacun en attendant que la Cour rende sa décision;

Considérant que des trois points énoncésdans les conclusions

de la Suisse au sujet de sa demande en indication de mesures
conservatoires, le second est le seul qui soit formulé en des termes
correspondant à l'exigence énoncéedans l'article 61, paragraphe 1,
du Règlement et qu'il se rattache à la préoccupation que doit avoir
la Cour de sauvegarder les droits que l'arrêt qu'elle aura à rendre
pourrait éventuellement reconnaître soit au demandeur, soit au
défendeur ;

IOmined by the United States and whereas the Government accord-
ingly "respectfully declines ...to submit the matter of the sale
or disposition of such shares to the jurisdiction of the Court" ;

Whereas at the hearing the Co-Agent of the Swiss Government
challenged this reservation, on a number of grounds, and stated
that, in its examination of a request for the indication of interim
measures of protection, the Court would not wish to adjudicate
"upon so complex and delicate a question as the validity of the
American reservation" ;
Whereas the procedure applicable to requests for the indication
of interim measures of protection is dealt with in the Rules of
Court by provisions which are laid down in Article 61 and which

appear, along with other procedures, in the section entitled:
"Occasional Rules" ;
Whereas the examination of the contention of the Government
of the United States requires the application of a different procedure,
the procedure laid down in Article 62 of the Rules of Court, and
whereas, if this contention is maintained, it will fa11to be dealt with
by the Court in due course in accordance ,with that procedure;

Whereas the request for the indication of interim measures of
protection must accordingly be examined in conformity with the
procedure laid down in Article 61;
\tThereas, finally, the decision given under this procedure in no
way prejudges the question of the jurisdiction of the Court to deal
with the merits of the case and leaves unaffected the right of the
Respondent to submit arguments against such jurisdiction;

Whereas the Swiss Government, by its request of October 3rd
for the indication by the Court "of the interim measures of protec-
tion which should be taken in order to safeguard the rights of the
Swiss Federal Government" purported to submit its request "in
conformitÿ with Article 41 of the Statute and Article 61 of the Rules
of Court" ;

iIThereas the Court, in order to decide what action should be
taken in pursuance of the request, must, in accordance with -Arti-
cle 41 of the Statute, ascertain what is required bl- the circum-
stances to preserve the respective rights of the Parties pending the
decision of the Court;
\Vhereas, of the three points set forth in the submissions of
Switzerland with regard to its rcclucst for the indication of interim
measures of protection, the second isthe onlj-one which is forrnulated
in terms fulfilling the requirement laid down in Article 61, para-
graph 1, of the Rules and n-hich relates to the conccrn of the Court

to preserve the rigfits which may hc subsequent1~-adjudgcd 11'-the
Court to bclong either to th? -2l)plicant or tu tht~ Res~~ondcilt;II2 ISTERHASDEL (~IESURES COXSERV.) (ORD. Dü 24 X 57)

Considérant, en conséquence,quela Cour doit porter son attention
sur ce point,à savoir l'invitation au Gouvernement des Etats-Lnis
d'Amérique de ne pas procéder à la vente des actions de la General
Aniline and Film Corporation revendiquées par le Gouvernement
suisse comme propriétéde ses ressortissants tant que la procédure
relative à ce différend est pendante;

Considérant qu'en l'état des informations fournies à la Cour il
apparaît que, selon la législation des Etats-Unis d'Amérique, la
vente desdites actions ne peut êtreeffectuée qu'à la suite d'une
instance judiciaire actuellement pendante dans ce pays et dont la
fin prochaine n'est pas annoncée, que cette \.ente est par là subor-
donnée à une décisionjudiciaire qui rejetterait les prétentions de
1'Interhandel;

Considéraqt d'autre part que, dans l'exposé desvues du Gouver-
nement des Etats-Cnis d'Amériquetransmis à la Cour le 19 octobre
1957, il est énoncéque ce Gouvernement (n'a pas l'intention pour
le moment de prendre des mesures en vue de fixer des délaispour
la vente de ces actions N;

Considérant que dans ces conditions il n'apparaît pas à la Cour
que les circonstances exigent l'indication des mesures conserva-
toires envisagées dans la demande du Gouvernement fédéral suisse;

Par ces motifs,

dit qu'il n'y a pas lieu d'indiquer des mesures conservatoires.

Fait en français et en anglais, le texte français faisant foi, au

Palais de la Paix, à La Haye, le vingt-quatre octobre mil neuf
cent cinquante-sept, en trois exemplaires, dont l'un restera déposé
aux archives de la Cour et dont les autres seront transmis respec-
tivement au Gouvernement de la Confédérationsuisse et au Gou-
vernement des États-unis d'Amérique.

Le Vice-Président :

(Signé)A. BADAWI.

Le Greffier:
(Signé) J. LOPEZ OLIVAN. Whereas, accordingly, the Court must direct its attention to this
point, namely, the request to the Government of the tTnited States
not to sel1the shares of the General Aniline and Film Corporation
claimed by the Suriss Government as the property of its nationals,
so long as the proceedings in this dispute are pending;

Whereas in the light of the information furnished to the Court,

it appears that, according to the law of the Gnited States, the sale
df those shares can onl~7be effected after termination of a judicial
proceeding which is at present pending in that country in respect
of which there is no indication as to its speedy conclusion, and
whereas such a sale is therefore conditional upon a judicial decision
rejecting the claims of Interhandel;
Whereas, on the other hand, in the statement of the views of the
Government of the United States transmitted to the Court on
October ~gth, 1957, it is said that thatGovernment "is not taking
action at the present time to fix a time schedule for the sale of such
shares" ;

Whereas in the premises it does not appear to the Court that the
circumstances require the indication of the provisional measures
envisaged in the request of the Swiss Federal Government ;

For these reasons,

finds that there is no need to indicate interim measures of
protection.

Done in French and English, the French text being authoritative,
at the Peace Palace, The Hague, this twenty-fourth day of October,
one thousand nine hundred and fifty-seven, in three copies, one of
which will be placed in the archives of the Court and the others
transmitted to the Government of the Swiss Confederation and the
Government of the United States of America, respectively.

fsigned) A. B.~D.~wI,
Vice-President.

/Signed) J. LOPEZ OLIVAX,
Registrar.II3 INTERHAKDEL (MESURES CONSERV( .)ORD.DU 24 X 57)

M. KLAESTADj,uge, joint à l'ordonnance l'exposéde son opinion
individuelle, à laquelle MM. HACKWORTHP ,résident, et READ,
juge, déclarent se rallier.

Sir Hersch LAUTERPACHjT u,ge, jointà l'ordonnance l'exposéde
son opinion individuelle.

M. WELLISGTOX KOO, juge, fait la déclaration suivante:
Je suis d'accord avec la décision de la Cour de ne pas

indiquer de mesures conservatoires en l'espèce,mais je regrette
de ne pas partager ses vues sur les raisons sur lesquelles se
fonde cette décision.A mon avis, la Cour n'a pas compétence
pour statuer sur la demande relative à ces mesures. Le Gou-
vernement des Etats-Vnis a soulevé une exception fondéesur
la réserve b) de sa déclaration du 14 août 1946, acceptant la
juridiction obligatoire de la Cour conformément à l'article36,
paragraphe 2, du Statut. La réserve b) précise que la décla-
ration ne s'appliquera pas ((...b) aux différends relatifà des
questjons relevant essentiellement de la compétence nationale
des Etats-Vnis d'Amérique, telle qu'elle est fixée par les

Etats-TJnis d'Amérique.)).
Quoique cette exception ait étésoulevéepar les États-~nis,
en vertu de l'article 62 du Règlement de la Cour, sous la
forme d'une exception préliminaire à la procédure ouverte par
la requête du Gouvernement suisse en date du I~~octobre
1957, ((pour autant que cette requête se rapporte à la vente
ou autres mesures de disposition des actions de la General
Aniline and Film Corporation, actuellement détenues par le
Gouvernement des Etats-Unis ))cette exception était, en fait,
dirigée contre la compétence de la Cour pour indiquer les
mesures conserv~toires demandées par le Gouvernement suisse

le 3 octobre 1957. Ceci a étéprécisépar l'agent des Etats-Unis
dans sa plaidoirie lors des audiences des 12 et 14 octobre
1957, conformément au paragraphe 8 de l'article 61 du Règle-
ment de la Cour, lorsqu'il a fait valoir que la réserve b) à la
déclaration d'acceptation des Etats-Unis excluait la compé-
tence de la Cour dans la auestion de la vente ou d'autres
mesures de disposition des actions de la G,eneraLA~~ilineand
Film Corporation - question dont les Etats-Cnis avaient
décidé qu'elle relevait essentiellement de sa compétence
nationale dans l'exercice de son droit, ainsi réservé par le

paragraphe b).
J'estime que cette exception est bien fondée,que la Cour n'est
pas compétente pour statuer sur la demande suisse tendant à
l'indication de mesures conservatoires et que sa décision
devrait être fondée sur ce motif. La raison se rapportant à
l'absence d'urgence est une circonstance réelle, mais le fait
pour la Cour de fonder sa décision sur ce motif implique Judge KLAESTADappends to the Order a statement of his
separate opinion, in which President HACKWORTa Hnd Judge READ
concur.

Judge SirHersch LAUTERPACa pTpends tothe Order a statement
of his separate opinion.

Judge WELLINGTON KOOmakes the following declaration:

1 agree with the decision of the Court not to indicate provi-
sional measures in the case, but regret that 1 do not share
the reasons upon which it is based. In my view, the Court has
no jurisdiction todeal with the request for such measures. The
Government of the United States raised an objection based
upon Proviso (b) of its Declaration of August 14th, 1946,
accepting the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court under
paragraph (2)of Article 36 of the Statute. Proviso (b) states
that the Declaration shall not apply to "...(b) disputes with
regard to matters which are essentially within the domestic
jurisdiction of the Cnited States of America as determined by

the United States of America".

Although the objection was raised by the United States in
the form of a Preliminary Objection, under Article 62 of the
Rules of Court, to the proceedings instituted by the Swiss
Government's Application of October ~st, 1957, "in so far as
that Application relates to the sale or other disposition of the
shares of General Aniline and Film Corporation now held by
the United States Government", it was, in fact, an objection
directed against the Court's jurisdiction to indicate provisional
measures, requested by the Swiss Government on October 3rd,
1957. This was made clear by the Agent of the L7nited States
in his observations at the proceedings held on October 12th

and ~qth, 1957, under paragraph 8 of Article 61 of the Rules
of Court, when he urged that Proviso (b) to the United States'
Declaration of Acceptance excluded the Court's jurisdiction
in the matter of the sale or other disposition of the shares of
the General Aniline and Film Corporation-a matter which
the United States had determined to be essentially within its
domestic jurisdiction in exercise of its reserved right under
Proviso (b) .

1consider that this objection is well founded, that the Court
is not competent to deal with the Swiss request for indication
of provisional measures and that its decision should be based

upon this ground. The reason of lack of urgency is a true
circumstance, but the placing of its decision on this ground
carries an implication that the Court considers the said Pro-
12II4 INTERHANDEL (MESURES CONSERV.) (ORD. DU 24 X 57)

qu'elle considère ladite réserve à)la déclaration des États-
Unis comme inapplicable à la question des mesures conser-
vatoires, alors qu'à mon avis elle est applicable.

M. KOJEVNIKOV, juge, déclare ne pouvoir se rallier à l'ordon-
nance.

(Paraphé) A. B.
(Paraphé) J. L. O. vis0 (b) to the ù'nited States' Declaration is not applicable
to the matter of provisional measures, whereas, in my view,
it is applicable.

Judge KOJEVNIKO dVeclares that he is unable to agree with the
Order.

ICJ document subtitle

Request for the indication of interim measures of protection (including the text of the declarations of Judges Hackworth, Read, Wellington Koo et Kojevnikov)

Document file FR
Document Long Title

Order of 24 October 1957

Links