INTERNATIONALCOURT OF JUSTICE
REPORTS OF JUDGMENTS,
ADVISORY OPINIONS AND ORDERS
FISHERIESJURISDICTIONCASE
(UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN
JRELAND i.ICELAND)
REQUEST FOR THE INDICATION OF INTERIM
MEASURES OF PROTECTION
ORDER OF 17 AUGUST 1972
COUR INTERNATIONALEDE JUSTICE
RECUEIL DES ARRÊTS,
AVIS CONSULTATIFS ET ORDONNANCES
AFFAIRE RELATIVE À LACOMPÉTENCE
EN MATIÈRE DE PÊCHERIES
(ROYAU ME-UNI DE GRANDE-BRETAGNE ET
D'IRLANDE DU NORD c.ISLANDE)
DEMANDE EN INDICATION DE MESURES
CONSERVATOIRES
ORDONNANCE DU 17 AOÛT 1972 Official citation
Fisheries Jurisdiction (United Kingdon1 of Great Britain and Nortliern
Ireland v. Iceland),Reports 1972,12.i17 August 1972, I.C.J.
Mode officiel de citation
et d'Irlande du Nord c. Islande), mesures conservatoires, ordonnancedu
17 août 1972,C.I.J. Recueil 1972,p. 12.
Saiesnumber366 1
No devente: 17 AUGUST 1972
ORDER
FlSHERlES JURlSDlCTION CASE
(UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN
IRELAND YICELAND)
REQUEST FOR THE INDICATION OF INTERIM
MEASURES OF PROTECTION
AFFAIRE RELATIVE À LA COMPÉTENCE EN
MATIÈRE DE PÊCHERIES
(ROYAUME-UNI DE GRANDE-BRETAGNE ET
D'IRLANDE DU NORD c. ISLANDE)
DEMANDE EN INDICATION DE MESURES CONSERVATOIRES
17 AOÛT 1972
ORDONNANCE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
YEAR 1972
Genera.7List
No. 55 17August 1972
FISHERIESJURISDICTIONCASE
(UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND
NORTHERN IRELAND Y.ICELAND)
REQUEST FOR THE INDICATION OF INTERIM
MEASURES OF PROTECTION
ORDER
Presrnt: President Sir Muhammad ZAFRULLAKHAN; Vice-President
AMMOUN:Judges Sir Gerald FITZMAURICE P,ADILLANERVO,
FORSTERG,ROS,BENGZONP,ETRÉNL , ACHS, NYEAMA D,ILLARD,
IGNACIO-PINTOD, CASTROM. OROZOVJ.IMÉNEZ DEARÉCHAGA;
Registrar AQUARONE.
The International Court of Justice.
Composed as above,
After deliberation,
Having regard to Articles 41 and 48 of theatute of the Court,
Having regard to Articlef the Rules of Court,
Having regard to the Application by the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and NortherIreland filed in the Registry of the Court on 14
April 1972, institutiproceedings against the Republof Icelandin respect of a dispute concerning the proposed extension by the Govern-
ment of Iceland of its fisheries jurisdiction, by which the Government of
the United Kingdom asks the Court to declare that Iceland's claim to
extend its exclusive fisheries jurisdiction to a zone of50 nautical miles
around Iceland is without foundation in international law,
Makes the following Order:
1. Having regard to the request dated 19 July 1972 and filed in the
Registry the same day, whereby the Government of the United Kingdom,
relying on Article 41 of the Statute and Article 61 of the Rules of Court,
asks to the Court to indicate, pending the final decision in the case
brought before it by the Application of 14 April 1972, the following
interim measures of protection:
"(a) The Government of Iceland should not seek to enforce the
regulations referred to in paragraph 4 [of the request] against,
or otherwise interfere or threaten to interfere with, vessels
registered in the United Kingdom fishing outside the 12-mile
limit agreed on by the parties in the Exchange of Notes be-
tween the Government of the United Kingdom and the
Government of Iceland dated 11 March 1961 (as set out in
Annex A to the said Application);
(b) the Government of Iceland should not take or threaten to take
in their territory (including their ports and territorial waters)
or inside the said 12-mile limit or elsewhere measures of any
kind against any vessels registered in the United Kingdom, or
against persons connected with such vessels, being measures
which have as their purpose or effect the impairment of the
freedom of such vessels to fish outside the said 12-mile limit;
(c) in conformity with sub-paragraph (a) above, vessels registered
in the United Kingdom should be free, save in so far as rnay be
provided for by arrangements between the Government of the
United Kingdom and the Government of Iceland such as are
referred to in paragraph 21 (6) of the said Application, to fish
as heretofore in al1 parts of the high seas outside the said
12-mile limit, but the Government of the United Kingdom
should ensure that such vessels do not take more than 185,000
metric tons of fish in any one year frorn the sea area of Iceland,
that is to say, the area defined by the International Council
for the Exploration of the Sea as area Va and so rnarked on
the map attached [to the request] at Annex B2;
(d) the Government of the United Kingdom and the Government
of Iceland should each seek to avoid circumstances arising
which are inconsistent with the foregoing measures and which are capable of aggravating or extending the dispute submitted
to the Court; and
(c) in conformity with the foregoing measures, the Government of
the United Kingdom and the Government of Iceland should
each ensure that no action is taken which might prejudice the
rights of the other party in respect of the carrying out of
whatever decision on the merits the Court may subsequently
render" ;
2. Whereas the Government of lceland was notified of the filing
of the Application instituting proceedings, on the same day. and a copy
thereof was at the same time transmitted to itby air mail;
3. Whereas the submissions set out in the request for the indication
ofjnterim measures of protection were on the day of the request commu-
nicated to the Government of Iceland. by telegram of 19July 1972,and a
copy of the request was at the same time transmitted to it by express
air mail, and in the telegram and the letter it was indicated that the Court,
in accordance with Article 61, paragraph 8, of the Rules of Court, was
ready to receive the observations of the Government of lceland on the
request in writing, and would hold hearings, opening on 1 August at
10a.m., to hear the observations of the Parties on the request:
4. Whereas the Application founds the jurisdiction of the Court
on Article 36, paragraph 1, of the Statute and on an Exchange of Notes
between the Governments of Iceland and of the United Kingdom dated
II March 1961;
5. Whereas by a letter dated 29 May 1972 from the Minister for
Foreign Affairs of Iceland, received in the Registry on 31 May 1972,
the Government of Iceland asserted that the agreement constituted by
the Exchange of Notes of 11March 1961was not of a permanent nature,
that its object and purpose had been fully achieved, and that it was
no longer applicable and had terminated; that there was on 14April 1972
no basis under the Statute of the Court to exercise jurisdiction in the
case; and that the Government of Iceland, considering that the vital
interests of the people of Iceland were involved, was not willing to confer
jurisdiction on the Court, and would not appoint an Agent;
6. Whereas by a telegram dated 28 July 1972,received in the Registry
of the Court on 29 July, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Iceland,
after reiterating that thr.c uas no basis under the Statute for the Court
to exercise jurisdictil)ii in the case to which the United Kingdom Appli-
cation referred, siated that there was no basis forthe request for provisio-
na1measures andthat, without prejudice to any of its previous argiiiii,,?tç
the Government of' Iceland objected specifically to the indication ot
provisional measures by the Court under Article 41 of the Statute and
Article 61 of the Rules of Court in the present case, where no basis for
jurisdiction was established; 7. Whereas at the opening of the public hearing which had been fixed
for 1 August 1972, there were present in court the Agent, counsel and
other advisers of the Government of the United Kingdom;
8. Having heard the observations of The Right Honourable Sir Peter
Rawlinson, Q.C., M.P., Attorney-General, on behalf of the Government
of the United Kingdom, on the request for provisional measures;
9. Noting that the Government of lceland was not represented at the
hearing ;
10. Having taken note of the written replies given on 3 August 1972
by the Agent of the Government of the United Kingdom to questions put
to him by the Court on 2 August 1972 on two points raised in the oral
observations ;
II. Whereas according to the jurisprudence of the Court and of the
Permanent Court of International Justice the non-appearance of one of
the parties cannot by itself constitute an obstacle to the indication of
provisional measures, provided the parties have been given an oppor-
tunity of presenting their observations on the subject;
12. Whereas in its message of 28 July 1972,the Government of Iceland
stated that the Application of 14April 1972was relevant only to the legal
position of the two States and not to the economic position of certain
private enterprises or other interests in one of those States, an obser-
vation which seems to question the connection which must exist under
Article 61, paragraph 1, of the Rules between a request for interim
measures of protection and the original Application filed with the Court;
13. Whereas in the Application by which the Government of the
United Kingdom instituted proceedings, that Government, by asking the
Court to adjudge that the extension of fisheries jurisdiction by Iceland
is invalid, is in fact requesting the Court to declare that the contemplated
measures of exclusion of foreign fishing vessels cannot be opposed by
lceland to fishing vessels registered in the United Kingdom;
14. Whereas the contention of the Applicant that its fishing vessels
are entitled to continue fishing within the above-mentioned zone of 50
nautical miles is part of the subject-matter of the dispute submitted to the
Court, and the request for provisional measures designed to protect such
rights is therefore directly connected with the Application filed on 14April
1972:
15. Whereas on a request for provisional measures the Court need
iiot, before indicating them, finally satisfy itself that it has jurisdiction
on the merits of the case, yet it ought not to act under Article 41 of the
Statute if the absence ofjurisdiction on the merits is manifest; 16. Whereas the penultimate paragraph of the Exchange of Notes
between the Governments of Iceland and of the United Kingdom dated
11 March 1961reads as follows:
"The lcelandic Government will continue to work for the imple-
mentation of the Althing Resolution of May 5, 1959, regarding the
extension of fisheries jurisdiction around Iceland, but shall give to
the United Kingdom Government six months' notice of such exten-
sion and, in case of a dispute in relation to such extension, the matter
shall, at the request of either party, be referred to the International
Court of Justice" ;
17. Whereas the above-cited provision in an instrument emanating
from both Parties to the dispute appears, prima facie, to afford a possible
basis on which the jurisdiction of the Court might be founded;
18. Whereas the complaint outlined in the United Kingdom Applica-
tion is that the Government of Iceland has announced its intention, as
from 1September 1972,to extend unilaterally its exclusive jurisdiction in
respect of the fisheries around Iceland to a distance of 50 nautical miles
from the baselines mentioned in the 1961 Exchange of Notes; and
whereas on 14 July 1972 the Government of Iceland issued Regulations
to that effect;
19. Whereas the contention of the Government of Iceland, in its
letter of 29 May 1972, that the above-quoted clause contained in the
Exchange of Notes of II March 1961has been terminated, will fall to be
examined by the Court in due course;
20. Whereas the decision given in the course of the present proceedings
in no way prejudges the question of the jurisdiction of the Court to deal
with the merits of the case or any questions relating to the merits them-
selves and leaves unafïected the right of the Respondent to submit
arguments against such jurisdiction or in respect of such merits;
21. Whereas the right of the Court to indicate provisional measures
as provided for in Article 41 of the Statute has as its object to preserve
the respective rights of the Parties pending the decision of the Court,
and presupposes that irreparable prejudice should not be caused to rights
which are the subject of dispute in judicial proceedings and that the
Court's judgment should not be anticipated by reason of any initiative
regarding the measures which are in issue;
22. Whereas the immediate implementation by Içeland of its Regula-
tions would, by anticipating the Court's judgment, prejudice the rights
claimed by the United Kingdom and affect the possibility of their full
restoration in the event of a judgment in its favour;
23. Whereas it is also necessary to bear in mind the exceptional depen-
dence of the Icelandic nation upon coastal fisheries for its livelihood and
economic development as expressly recognized by the United Kingdom
in its Note addressed to the Foreign Minister of lceland dated II March
1961 ; 24. Whereas from this point of view account must be taken of the need
or the conservation of fish stocks in the lceland area:
25. Whereas the total catch by United Kingdom vessels in that area
in the year 1970 was 164,000 metric tons and in the year 1971 was
207,000 metric tons; and whereas the figure of 185,000 metric tons
mentioned in the United Kingdom request for interim measures was
based on the average annual catch for the period 1960-1969;
26. Whereas in the Court's opinion the average of the catch should,
for purposes of interim measures, and so as to reflect the present situation
zoncerning fisheries of different species in the Tceland area, be based on
the available statistical information before the Court for the five years
1967-1971,which produces an approximate figure of 170,000metric tons,
Accordingly,
THE COURT,
by fourteen votes to one,
(1) Indicates. pending its final decision in the proceedings instituted
on 14April 1972by the Government of the United Kingdom against
the Government of Iceland, the following provisional measures:
(a) the United Kingdom and the Republic of Iceland should each of
them ensure that no action of any kind is taken which might
aggravate or extend the dispute submitted to the Court;
(h) the United Kingdom and the Republic of Iceland should each of
them ensure that no action is taken which might prejudice the
rights of the other Party in respect of the carrying out ofwhat-
ever decision on the merits the Court may render;
(L.)the Republic of lceland should refrain from taking any measures
to enforce the Regulations of 14 July 1972 against vessels
registered in the United Kingdom and engaged in fishing activi-
ties in the waters around lceland outside the 12-milefishery zone;
(d) the Republic of lceland should refrain from applying administra-
tive, judicial or other measures against ships registered in the
United Kingdom, their crews or other related persons, because
of their having engaged in fishing activities in the waters around
lceland outside the 12-milefishery zone;
(e) the United Kingdom should ensure that vessels registered in
the United Kingdom do not take an annual catch of more than
170,000 metric tons of fish from the "Sea Area of Iceland" as
defined by the International Council for the Exploration of
the Sea as area Va; (f) the United Kingdom Governrnent should furnish the Govern-
ment of Iceland and the Registry of the Court with al1 relevant
information, orders issued and arrangements made concerning
the control and regulation of fish catches in the area.
(2) Unless the Court has rneanwhile delivered its final judgrnent in the
case, it shall, at an appropriate time befor15 August 1973, review
the matter at the request of either Party in order to decide whether
the foregoing measures shall continue or need to be modified or
revoked.
Done in English and in French, the English text being authoritative,
at the Peace Palace, The Hague, this seventeenth day of August,
one thousand nine hundred and seventy-two, in four copies, one of
which will be placed in the archives of the Court, and the others trans-
rnitted respectively to the Government of the Republic of Iceland,
to the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland, and to the Secretary-General of the United Nations for trans-
mission to the Security Council.
(Signed) ZAFRULLA KHAN,
President.
(Signed) S. AQUARONE,
Registrar.
Vice-President AMMOUa Nnd Judges FORSTER and JIMENEZ DE ARÉCHAGA
rnake the following joint declaration:
We have voted for this Order taking into account that the serious
problerns of the contemporary law of the sea which arise in this case
are part of the nierits, are not in issue at the present stage of the pro-
ceedings and have not in any way been touched upon by the Order.
When indicating interim measures the Court must only take into account
whether, if action is taken by one of the Parties pending the judicial
proceedings, there is likelihood of irremediable damage to the rights
which have been claimed before it and upon which it would have to
adjudicate. It follows therefore that a vote for this Order cannot have
the slightest implication as to the validity or otherwise of the rights
protected by such Order or of the rights claimed by a coastal State
dependent on the fish stock of its continental shelf or of a fishery zone.
Those substantive questions have not been prejudged at al1since the Courtwill, if it declares itself competent, examine them, after affording the
Parties the opportunity of arguing their cases.
Judge PADILLA NERVO appends a dissenting opinion to the Order of the
Court.
(lnitialled)Z. K.
(Initiulled)S. A.
INTERNATIONALCOURT OF JUSTICE
REPORTS OF JUDGMENTS,
ADVISORY OPINIONS AND ORDERS
FISHERIESJURISDICTIONCASE
(UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN
JRELAND i.ICELAND)
REQUEST FOR THE INDICATION OF INTERIM
MEASURES OF PROTECTION
ORDER OF 17 AUGUST 1972
COUR INTERNATIONALEDE JUSTICE
RECUEIL DES ARRÊTS,
AVIS CONSULTATIFS ET ORDONNANCES
AFFAIRE RELATIVE À LACOMPÉTENCE
EN MATIÈRE DE PÊCHERIES
(ROYAU ME-UNI DE GRANDE-BRETAGNE ET
D'IRLANDE DU NORD c.ISLANDE)
DEMANDE EN INDICATION DE MESURES
CONSERVATOIRES
ORDONNANCE DU 17 AOÛT 1972 Official citation
Fisheries Jurisdiction (United Kingdon1 of Great Britain and Nortliern
Ireland v. Iceland),Reports 1972,12.i17 August 1972, I.C.J.
Mode officiel de citation
et d'Irlande du Nord c. Islande), mesures conservatoires, ordonnancedu
17 août 1972,C.I.J. Recueil 1972,p. 12.
Saiesnumber366 1
No devente: 17 AUGUST 1972
ORDER
FlSHERlES JURlSDlCTION CASE
(UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN
IRELAND YICELAND)
REQUEST FOR THE INDICATION OF INTERIM
MEASURES OF PROTECTION
AFFAIRE RELATIVE À LA COMPÉTENCE EN
MATIÈRE DE PÊCHERIES
(ROYAUME-UNI DE GRANDE-BRETAGNE ET
D'IRLANDE DU NORD c. ISLANDE)
DEMANDE EN INDICATION DE MESURES CONSERVATOIRES
17 AOÛT 1972
ORDONNANCE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
YEAR 1972
Genera.7List
No. 55 17August 1972
FISHERIESJURISDICTIONCASE
(UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND
NORTHERN IRELAND Y.ICELAND)
REQUEST FOR THE INDICATION OF INTERIM
MEASURES OF PROTECTION
ORDER
Presrnt: President Sir Muhammad ZAFRULLAKHAN; Vice-President
AMMOUN:Judges Sir Gerald FITZMAURICE P,ADILLANERVO,
FORSTERG,ROS,BENGZONP,ETRÉNL , ACHS, NYEAMA D,ILLARD,
IGNACIO-PINTOD, CASTROM. OROZOVJ.IMÉNEZ DEARÉCHAGA;
Registrar AQUARONE.
The International Court of Justice.
Composed as above,
After deliberation,
Having regard to Articles 41 and 48 of theatute of the Court,
Having regard to Articlef the Rules of Court,
Having regard to the Application by the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and NortherIreland filed in the Registry of the Court on 14
April 1972, institutiproceedings against the Republof Iceland COUR INTERNATIONALE DE JUSTICE
1972
17août
Rôle général
no 55
17août 1972
AFFAIRE RELATIVE À LACOMPÉTENCE
EN MATIÈRE DE PÊCHERIES
(ROYAUME-UNI DE GRANDE-BRETAGNE ET
D'IRLANDE DU NORD c. ISLANDE)
DEMANDE EN INDlCATlON
DE MESURES CONSERVATOIRES
ORDONNANCE
Présents: Sir Muhammad ZAFRULLLAKHAN,Président; M. AMMOUN,
Vice-Présidt sir Gerald FITZMAURE,M. PADILLNERVO,
FORSTER G,ROS, ENGZONPETRÉNL , ACHS, NYEAMAD,ILLARD,
IGNACIO-PINTODE, CASTRO, OROZOVJ,IMÉNEZDEARECHAGA,
juges: M. AQUARONEG,reffier.
La Cour internationale de Justice,
Ainsi composée,
Après délibéen chambre du conseil,
Vu les articles 41 et 48 du Statut de la Cour,
Vu l'article 61 du Règlement de la Cour,
Vu la requête enregistréereffe de la Cour le 14 avril 1972, par
laquelle le Royaume-Uni de Grande-Bretagne et d'Irlande du Nord a
introduiune instance contre la République d'Islande au sujet d'unin respect of a dispute concerning the proposed extension by the Govern-
ment of Iceland of its fisheries jurisdiction, by which the Government of
the United Kingdom asks the Court to declare that Iceland's claim to
extend its exclusive fisheries jurisdiction to a zone of50 nautical miles
around Iceland is without foundation in international law,
Makes the following Order:
1. Having regard to the request dated 19 July 1972 and filed in the
Registry the same day, whereby the Government of the United Kingdom,
relying on Article 41 of the Statute and Article 61 of the Rules of Court,
asks to the Court to indicate, pending the final decision in the case
brought before it by the Application of 14 April 1972, the following
interim measures of protection:
"(a) The Government of Iceland should not seek to enforce the
regulations referred to in paragraph 4 [of the request] against,
or otherwise interfere or threaten to interfere with, vessels
registered in the United Kingdom fishing outside the 12-mile
limit agreed on by the parties in the Exchange of Notes be-
tween the Government of the United Kingdom and the
Government of Iceland dated 11 March 1961 (as set out in
Annex A to the said Application);
(b) the Government of Iceland should not take or threaten to take
in their territory (including their ports and territorial waters)
or inside the said 12-mile limit or elsewhere measures of any
kind against any vessels registered in the United Kingdom, or
against persons connected with such vessels, being measures
which have as their purpose or effect the impairment of the
freedom of such vessels to fish outside the said 12-mile limit;
(c) in conformity with sub-paragraph (a) above, vessels registered
in the United Kingdom should be free, save in so far as rnay be
provided for by arrangements between the Government of the
United Kingdom and the Government of Iceland such as are
referred to in paragraph 21 (6) of the said Application, to fish
as heretofore in al1 parts of the high seas outside the said
12-mile limit, but the Government of the United Kingdom
should ensure that such vessels do not take more than 185,000
metric tons of fish in any one year frorn the sea area of Iceland,
that is to say, the area defined by the International Council
for the Exploration of the Sea as area Va and so rnarked on
the map attached [to the request] at Annex B2;
(d) the Government of the United Kingdom and the Government
of Iceland should each seek to avoid circumstances arising
which are inconsistent with the foregoing measures and whichdifférendportant sur l'extension de sa compétence en niatiè~ede pêche-
ries annoncée par le Gouvernement islandais et par laquelle le Gouverne-
ment du Royaume-Uni a prié la Cour de dire que la prétention de
l'lslande d'étendre sa zone de compétence exclusive sur les pêcheries
autour de l'lslande jusqu'à 50 niilles marins n'est pas fondée en droit
international,
Rend l'ordonnance sui~,unte:
1. Vu la demande datée du 19juillet 1972 et enregistrée au Greffe le
mêmejour, par laquelle le Gouvernement du Royaume-Uni, en invoquant
l'article 41 du Statut et l'article 61 du Règlement, a prié la Cour d'in-
diquer, en attendant l'arrêtdéfinitifen l'affaire dont la Cour a été saisie
par la requêtedu 14avril 1972, les mesures conservatoires suivantes:
((a)le Gouvernement islandais s'abstiendra de mettre en applica-
tion la régi,ementation viséeau paragraphe 4 [de la demande]
et de prendre toute autre niesure qui entraverait ou menacerait
d'entraver l'activité de p2che des navires immatriculés au
Royaume-Uni au-delà de la limite de 17 milles fixéede commun
accord par les Parties dans l'échangede notes du 11 mars 1961
entre li Gouvernement du Royaume-Uni et le Gouvernement
islandais (reproduit à l'annexe A de la requête);
b) le Gouvernement islandais s'abstiendra de p-~ndre ou de
menacer de prendre, soit sur son territoire. y compris les ports
et les eaux territoriales, soit en deçà de la limite de 12 milles ou
en tout autre lieu, des mesures de quelque ordre que ce soit qui,
frappant des navires immatriculés au Royaume-Uni ou des
personnes ayant un lien avec ceux-ci, auraient pour but ou pour
effet de porter atteinte à la liberté de ces navires de pêcherau-
delà de ladite limite de 12 milles;
c) conformément à l'alinéa a) ci-dessus, les nav;.cs immatriculés
au Royaume-Uni seront libres de pêcher comnie auparavant
dans toutes les parties de la haute mer au-delà de la limite de
12 milles, sous réserve des arrangements qui pourraient être
conclus entre le Gouvernement du Royaume-Uni et le Gouverne-
ment islandais dans lesconditions indiquéesau paragraphe 21 6)
de la requête; cependant le Gouvernement du Royaume-Uni
veilleraà ce que lesdits navires ne prennent pas plus de 185000
tonnes métriquesde poisson chaque année dans la zone maritime
islandaise, qui a étédéfinie par le Conseil international pour
l'exploration de la mer comnie régionVa et qui est ainsi désignée
sur la carte figurant à l'annexe92 [jointe à la demande];
d) le Gouvernement du Royaume-Uni et le Gouvernement isian-
dais devront l'un et l'autre s'efforcer d'éviter que puissent se
créer dessituations qui seraient incompatibles avec les mesures are capable of aggravating or extending the dispute submitted
to the Court; and
(c) in conformity with the foregoing measures, the Government of
the United Kingdom and the Government of Iceland should
each ensure that no action is taken which might prejudice the
rights of the other party in respect of the carrying out of
whatever decision on the merits the Court may subsequently
render" ;
2. Whereas the Government of lceland was notified of the filing
of the Application instituting proceedings, on the same day. and a copy
thereof was at the same time transmitted to itby air mail;
3. Whereas the submissions set out in the request for the indication
ofjnterim measures of protection were on the day of the request commu-
nicated to the Government of Iceland. by telegram of 19July 1972,and a
copy of the request was at the same time transmitted to it by express
air mail, and in the telegram and the letter it was indicated that the Court,
in accordance with Article 61, paragraph 8, of the Rules of Court, was
ready to receive the observations of the Government of lceland on the
request in writing, and would hold hearings, opening on 1 August at
10a.m., to hear the observations of the Parties on the request:
4. Whereas the Application founds the jurisdiction of the Court
on Article 36, paragraph 1, of the Statute and on an Exchange of Notes
between the Governments of Iceland and of the United Kingdom dated
II March 1961;
5. Whereas by a letter dated 29 May 1972 from the Minister for
Foreign Affairs of Iceland, received in the Registry on 31 May 1972,
the Government of Iceland asserted that the agreement constituted by
the Exchange of Notes of 11March 1961was not of a permanent nature,
that its object and purpose had been fully achieved, and that it was
no longer applicable and had terminated; that there was on 14April 1972
no basis under the Statute of the Court to exercise jurisdiction in the
case; and that the Government of Iceland, considering that the vital
interests of the people of Iceland were involved, was not willing to confer
jurisdiction on the Court, and would not appoint an Agent;
6. Whereas by a telegram dated 28 July 1972,received in the Registry
of the Court on 29 July, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Iceland,
after reiterating that thr.c uas no basis under the Statute for the Court
to exercise jurisdictil)ii in the case to which the United Kingdom Appli-
cation referred, siated that there was no basis forthe request for provisio-
na1measures andthat, without prejudice to any of its previous argiiiii,,?tç
the Government of' Iceland objected specifically to the indication ot
provisional measures by the Court under Article 41 of the Statute and
Article 61 of the Rules of Court in the present case, where no basis for
jurisdiction was established; énoncées ci-dessuset qui seraient de nature à aggraver ou à
étendre le différend dont la Cour est saisie; et
r) conformément aux mesures énoncées ci-dessus, le Gouverne-
ment du Royaume-Uni et le Gouvernement islandais devront
l'un et l'autre veiller à éviter tout acte qui risquerait de porter
atteinte au droit de l'autre Partie à obtenir l'exécution de tout
arrêtque la Cour pourrait rendre ultérieurement sur le fond de
I'affaire1);
2. Considérant que le dépôt de la requêteintroductive d'instance a été
notifiéau Gouvernement islandais le jour mêmeet qu'il lui a étésimul-
tanément transmis copie de la requêtepar courrier aérien;
3. Considérant aue les conclusions formulées dans la demande en in-
dication de mesures conservatoires ont eté communiquées au Gouverne-
ment islandais le jour mêmedu dépbt de cette demande par télégramme
du 19 juillet 1972, qu'il lui a été simultanément transmis copie de la
demande par courrier aérien exprès et qu'il était indiquédans le télé-
gramme et dans la lettre que, conforniément à I'article 61, paragraphe 8,
du Règlement. la Cour était disposée à recevoir les observations écrites
du Gouvernement islandais au sujet de la demande et ouvrirait la procé-
dure orale le Ieaoût 1973à IOheures pour entendre les observations des
Parties sur la demande;
4. Considérant que, d'après la requête introductive d'instance, la
compétence de la Cour est fondée sur I'article 36, paragraphe I, du
Statut et sur un échangede notes entre les Gouvernements de l'Islande et
du Royaume-Uni en date du II mars 1961;
5. Considérant que, par lettre du ministre des Affaires étrangères
d'Islande datée du 29 mai 1972 et reçue au Greffe le 3 1 mai 1972, le
Gouvernement islandais a affirméque l'accord constitué par l'échange
de notes du II mars 1961n'avait pas un caractère permanent, qu'il avait
entièrement atteint son but et son objet, qu'il n'était plusapplicable et
qu'il avait pris fin;qu'à la date du 14avril 1972la Cour ne pouvait trouver
dans son Statut aucun fondement pour l'exercice de sa compétence en
I'affaire, et .ue le Gouvernement islandais. considérant aue les intérêts
vitaux du peuple islandais étaient en jeu, n'était pas disposé à attribuer
compétence à la Cour et ne désignerait pas d'agent:
6. Considérant que, par télégrammedu 28 juillet 1972 reçu au Greffe
de la Cour le 29juillet, le ministre des Affairesétrangères d'Islande, après
avoir dit à nouveau que la Cour ne pouvait trouver dans son Statut
aucun fondement pour l'exercice de sa compétence dans l'affaire visée
par la requêtedu Royaume-Uni, a déclaré quela demande de mesures
conservatoires était sans fondement et que. sans préjudice d'aucun des
arguments qu'il avait antérieurement formulés, le Gouvernement islan-
dais s'opposait tout particulièrement à l'indication par la Cour de me-
sures conservatoires, en vertu de I'article41 du Statut et de l'article 61 du
Règlement, en la présente affaire dans laquelle aucun fondement de la
conlpétence n'est établi; 7. Whereas at the opening of the public hearing which had been fixed
for 1 August 1972, there were present in court the Agent, counsel and
other advisers of the Government of the United Kingdom;
8. Having heard the observations of The Right Honourable Sir Peter
Rawlinson, Q.C., M.P., Attorney-General, on behalf of the Government
of the United Kingdom, on the request for provisional measures;
9. Noting that the Government of lceland was not represented at the
hearing ;
10. Having taken note of the written replies given on 3 August 1972
by the Agent of the Government of the United Kingdom to questions put
to him by the Court on 2 August 1972 on two points raised in the oral
observations ;
II. Whereas according to the jurisprudence of the Court and of the
Permanent Court of International Justice the non-appearance of one of
the parties cannot by itself constitute an obstacle to the indication of
provisional measures, provided the parties have been given an oppor-
tunity of presenting their observations on the subject;
12. Whereas in its message of 28 July 1972,the Government of Iceland
stated that the Application of 14April 1972was relevant only to the legal
position of the two States and not to the economic position of certain
private enterprises or other interests in one of those States, an obser-
vation which seems to question the connection which must exist under
Article 61, paragraph 1, of the Rules between a request for interim
measures of protection and the original Application filed with the Court;
13. Whereas in the Application by which the Government of the
United Kingdom instituted proceedings, that Government, by asking the
Court to adjudge that the extension of fisheries jurisdiction by Iceland
is invalid, is in fact requesting the Court to declare that the contemplated
measures of exclusion of foreign fishing vessels cannot be opposed by
lceland to fishing vessels registered in the United Kingdom;
14. Whereas the contention of the Applicant that its fishing vessels
are entitled to continue fishing within the above-mentioned zone of 50
nautical miles is part of the subject-matter of the dispute submitted to the
Court, and the request for provisional measures designed to protect such
rights is therefore directly connected with the Application filed on 14April
1972:
15. Whereas on a request for provisional measures the Court need
iiot, before indicating them, finally satisfy itself that it has jurisdiction
on the merits of the case, yet it ought not to act under Article 41 of the
Statute if the absence ofjurisdiction on the merits is manifest; 7. Considérant qu'à l'ouverture de l'audience publique, qui avait été
fixéeau 1" août 1972,étaient présents devant la Cour l'agent du Gouver-
nement du Royaume-Uni, ainsi que les avocats et les autres conseils
dudit Gouvernement;
8. Ayant entendu en ses observations sur la demande de mesures
conservatoires le très honorable sir Peter Rawlison, Q.C., membre du
Parlement, Attorney-General, au nom du Gouvernement du Royaume-
Uni;
9. Constatant que le Gouvernement islandais ne s'est pas fait repré-
senter à l'audience;
10. Ayant pris connaissance des réponses écrites faitesle 3 août 1972
par l'agent du Gouvernement du Royaume-Uni à des questions à lui
posées par la Cour le 2 août 1972 sur deux points soulevés dans les
observations orales;
11. Considérant que, selon la jurisprudence de la Cour et de la Cour
permanente de Justice internationale, la non-comparution de l'une des
parties ne saurait en soi constituer un obstacle à l'indication de mesures
conservatoires, pour autant que la possibilité de faire entendre leurs
observations à ce sujet ait étédonnée aux parties;
12. Considérant que, dans son télégramme du 28 juillet 1972, le
Gouvernement islandais a affirméque la requêtedu 14avril 1972intéresse
uniquement la situation juridique des deux Etats et non la situation
économique de certaines entreprises privées ou d'autres intérêtsdans
l'un de ces Etats et que, par cette observation, ilsemble mettre en doute
le lien qui doit exister, en vertu de l'article 61, paragraphe 1, du Règle-
ment, entre une demande en indication de mesures conservatoires et la
requête initiale;
13. Considérant que, dans sa requête introductive d'instance, le
Gouvernement du Royaume-Uni, en priant la Cour de dire que I'exten-
sion de la compétence de l'Islande en matière de pêcheries n'est pas
valable, a demandé en fait à la Cour de déclarer que les mesures d'exclu-
sion des navires de pêche étrangers envisagéespar l'Islande ne sont pas
opposables aux navires de pêcheimmatriculés au Royaume-Uni;
14. Considérant que la thèsedu demandeur suivant laquelle ses navires
ont le droit de continuer à pratiquer la pêchedans la zone de 50 milles
marins ci-dessus mentionnée constitue l'un des élémentsde l'objet du
différend soumis à la Cour et que la demande en indication de mesures
conservatoires destinée à protéger ce droit est donc directement liéeà
la requête déposée le 14 avril 1972;
15. Considérant que, lorsqu'elle est saisie d'une demande en indication
de mesures conservatoires, la Cour n'a pas besoin, avant d'indiquer ces
mesures, de s'assurer de manière concluante de sa compétence quant au
fond de l'affaire, mais qu'elle ne doit cependant pas appliquer l'article
41 du Statut lorsque son incompétence au fond est manifeste; 16. Whereas the penultimate paragraph of the Exchange of Notes
between the Governments of Iceland and of the United Kingdom dated
11 March 1961reads as follows:
"The lcelandic Government will continue to work for the imple-
mentation of the Althing Resolution of May 5, 1959, regarding the
extension of fisheries jurisdiction around Iceland, but shall give to
the United Kingdom Government six months' notice of such exten-
sion and, in case of a dispute in relation to such extension, the matter
shall, at the request of either party, be referred to the International
Court of Justice" ;
17. Whereas the above-cited provision in an instrument emanating
from both Parties to the dispute appears, prima facie, to afford a possible
basis on which the jurisdiction of the Court might be founded;
18. Whereas the complaint outlined in the United Kingdom Applica-
tion is that the Government of Iceland has announced its intention, as
from 1September 1972,to extend unilaterally its exclusive jurisdiction in
respect of the fisheries around Iceland to a distance of 50 nautical miles
from the baselines mentioned in the 1961 Exchange of Notes; and
whereas on 14 July 1972 the Government of Iceland issued Regulations
to that effect;
19. Whereas the contention of the Government of Iceland, in its
letter of 29 May 1972, that the above-quoted clause contained in the
Exchange of Notes of II March 1961has been terminated, will fall to be
examined by the Court in due course;
20. Whereas the decision given in the course of the present proceedings
in no way prejudges the question of the jurisdiction of the Court to deal
with the merits of the case or any questions relating to the merits them-
selves and leaves unafïected the right of the Respondent to submit
arguments against such jurisdiction or in respect of such merits;
21. Whereas the right of the Court to indicate provisional measures
as provided for in Article 41 of the Statute has as its object to preserve
the respective rights of the Parties pending the decision of the Court,
and presupposes that irreparable prejudice should not be caused to rights
which are the subject of dispute in judicial proceedings and that the
Court's judgment should not be anticipated by reason of any initiative
regarding the measures which are in issue;
22. Whereas the immediate implementation by Içeland of its Regula-
tions would, by anticipating the Court's judgment, prejudice the rights
claimed by the United Kingdom and affect the possibility of their full
restoration in the event of a judgment in its favour;
23. Whereas it is also necessary to bear in mind the exceptional depen-
dence of the Icelandic nation upon coastal fisheries for its livelihood and
economic development as expressly recognized by the United Kingdom
in its Note addressed to the Foreign Minister of lceland dated II March
1961 ; 16. Considérant que l'avant-dernier alinéa de l'échange de notes
entre les Gouvernements de I'lslande et du Royaume-Uni en date du
II mars 1961 a la teneur suivante :
Le Gouvernement islandais continuera de s'employer à mettre
en Œuvre la résolution de I'Althing en dats du 5 mai 1959 relative à
l'élargissementde la juridiction sur les pêcheriesautour de I'lslande
mais notifiera six mois à l'avance au Gouvernement du Royaume-
Uni toute mesure en ce sens; au cas où surgirait un différend en la
matière, la question sera portée, à la demande de l'une ou l'autre
partie, devant la Cour internationale de Justice ));
17. Considérant que cette disposition, dans un instrument émanantdes
deux Parties au différend, se présentecomme constituant prirna,facieune
base sur laquelle la compétence de la Cour pourrait être fondée;
18. Considérant que le grief indiquédans la requêtedu Royaun~e-Uni
est que le Gouvernement islandais a annoncé son intention d'étendre
unilatéralement à dater du ier septembre 1972 sa juridiction exclusive
sur les pêcheriesautour de l'Islande à une distance de 50 milles marins
à partir des lignes de base mentionnées dans l'échangede notes de 1961:
et que le Gouvernement islandais a proinulgué un règlement à cet effet le
14juillet 1972;
19. Considérant que la thèse exposéepar le Gouvernement islandais
dans sa lettre du 29 mai 1972et selon laauelle la clause récitée des notes
échangéesle II mars 1961 est devenue caduque devra, le moment venu,
êtreexaminée Dar la Cour:
20. Considérant qu'une décisiori rendue au cours de la présente
procédure ne préjuge en rien la comp2tence de la Cour pour connaître
du fond de l'affaire ni aucune question relative au fond lui-même etqu'elle
laisse intact le droit du défendeur de faire valoir ses moyens tant sur la
compétence que sur le fond;
21. Considérant que le droit pour la Cour d'indiquer des niesures
conservatoires, prévuà l'article 41 du Statut. a pour objet de sauvegarder
les droits des parties en attendant que la Cour rende sa décision, qu'il
présuppose qu'un préjudice irréparable ne doit pas être causé auxdroits
en litige devant le juge et qu'aucune initiative concernant les mesures
litigieuses ne doit anticiper sur l'arrêtde la Cour;
22. Considérant que la mise en application immédiate de son règlement
par I'lslande, en anticipant sur l'arrêtde la Cour, porterait préjudice
aux droits invoqués par le Royaume-Uni et nuira.it à la possibilité de
leur rétablissement intégralau cas où la Cour se prononcerait en sa
faveur:
23. Considérant qu'il faut également ne pas oublier que la nation islam-
daise est exceptionnellement tributaire de ses pêcheriescbtières pour sa
subsistance et son développement économique, ainsi que le Royaume-
Uni l'a reconnu dans la note adressée le II mars 1961 au ministre des
Affaires étrangèresd'Islande: 24. Whereas from this point of view account must be taken of the need
or the conservation of fish stocks in the lceland area:
25. Whereas the total catch by United Kingdom vessels in that area
in the year 1970 was 164,000 metric tons and in the year 1971 was
207,000 metric tons; and whereas the figure of 185,000 metric tons
mentioned in the United Kingdom request for interim measures was
based on the average annual catch for the period 1960-1969;
26. Whereas in the Court's opinion the average of the catch should,
for purposes of interim measures, and so as to reflect the present situation
zoncerning fisheries of different species in the Tceland area, be based on
the available statistical information before the Court for the five years
1967-1971,which produces an approximate figure of 170,000metric tons,
Accordingly,
THE COURT,
by fourteen votes to one,
(1) Indicates. pending its final decision in the proceedings instituted
on 14April 1972by the Government of the United Kingdom against
the Government of Iceland, the following provisional measures:
(a) the United Kingdom and the Republic of Iceland should each of
them ensure that no action of any kind is taken which might
aggravate or extend the dispute submitted to the Court;
(h) the United Kingdom and the Republic of Iceland should each of
them ensure that no action is taken which might prejudice the
rights of the other Party in respect of the carrying out ofwhat-
ever decision on the merits the Court may render;
(L.)the Republic of lceland should refrain from taking any measures
to enforce the Regulations of 14 July 1972 against vessels
registered in the United Kingdom and engaged in fishing activi-
ties in the waters around lceland outside the 12-milefishery zone;
(d) the Republic of lceland should refrain from applying administra-
tive, judicial or other measures against ships registered in the
United Kingdom, their crews or other related persons, because
of their having engaged in fishing activities in the waters around
lceland outside the 12-milefishery zone;
(e) the United Kingdom should ensure that vessels registered in
the United Kingdom do not take an annual catch of more than
170,000 metric tons of fish from the "Sea Area of Iceland" as
defined by the International Council for the Exploration of
the Sea as area Va; 24. Considérant que, de ce point de vue, il faut tenir compte de la
nécessitéde la conservation des stocks de poisson dans la région de
l'Islande ;
,25. Considérant que les prises de poisson des navires du Royaume-
Uni dans cette région ont étéau total de 164000 tonnes métriques en
1970et de 207 000 tonnes métriques en 1971 ; et que le chiffre d185 000
tonnes métriques dont le Gouvernement du Royaume-Uni a fait étatdans
sa demande en indication de mesures conservatoires est fondé sur la
moyenne annuelle des prises pour la période 1960-1969;
26. Considérant que, de l'avis de la Cour, pour refléter la situation
actuelle en ce qui concerne la pêche des diverses espècesde poisson dans
la région de l'Islande, la moyenne des prises doit, aux fins des mesures
conservatoires, être établie d'après les données statistiques dont dispose
la Cour pour les cinq années 1967-1971,ce qui donne un chiffre approxi-
matif de 170 000 tonnes métriques,
En conséquence,
par quatorze voix contre une,
1) Indique à titre provisoire, en attendant son arrêtdéfinitifdans I'ins-
tance introduite le 14avril 1972par le Gouvernement du Royaume-
Uni contre le Gouvernement islandais, les mesures conservatoires sui-
vantes tendant à ce que:
a) le Royaume-Uni et la R-épubliqued'lslande veillent I'unet l'autre à
évitertout acte qui risquerait d'aggraver ou d'étendre le différend
dont la Cour est saisie;
b) le Royaume-Uni et la République d'lslande veillent I'un et l'autre
à éviter tout acte qui risquerait de porter atteinte au droit de
I'autre Partie à obtenir l'exécution de tout arrêt que la Cour
pourrait rendre sur le fond de l'affaire:
c) la République d'Islande s'abstienne de toute mesure visant à
appliquer le règlement du 14juillet 1972aux navires immatriculés
au Royaume-Uni et pêchant dans les eaux avoisinant l'Islande
au-delà de la zone de pêchede 12 milles;
d) la République d'lslande s'abstienne d'appliquer, à l'encontre des
navires immatriculés au Roya~ime-Uni, de leurs équipages ou des
autres personnes intéressées, dessanctions administratives, judi-
ciaires ou autres ou toute autre mesure, pour le motif que ces
navires ou ces personnes auraient pêchédans les eaux avoisinant
l'Islande au-delà de la zone de pêchede 12 niilles;
e) le Royaume-Uni veille à ce que les prises annuelles des navires
immatriculés sur son territoire ne dépassent pas 170000 tonnes
métriques de poisson dans la zone maritime islandaise que le
Conseil international pour l'exploration de la mer a définiecomme
région Va: (f) the United Kingdom Governrnent should furnish the Govern-
ment of Iceland and the Registry of the Court with al1 relevant
information, orders issued and arrangements made concerning
the control and regulation of fish catches in the area.
(2) Unless the Court has rneanwhile delivered its final judgrnent in the
case, it shall, at an appropriate time befor15 August 1973, review
the matter at the request of either Party in order to decide whether
the foregoing measures shall continue or need to be modified or
revoked.
Done in English and in French, the English text being authoritative,
at the Peace Palace, The Hague, this seventeenth day of August,
one thousand nine hundred and seventy-two, in four copies, one of
which will be placed in the archives of the Court, and the others trans-
rnitted respectively to the Government of the Republic of Iceland,
to the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland, and to the Secretary-General of the United Nations for trans-
mission to the Security Council.
(Signed) ZAFRULLA KHAN,
President.
(Signed) S. AQUARONE,
Registrar.
Vice-President AMMOUa Nnd Judges FORSTER and JIMENEZ DE ARÉCHAGA
rnake the following joint declaration:
We have voted for this Order taking into account that the serious
problerns of the contemporary law of the sea which arise in this case
are part of the nierits, are not in issue at the present stage of the pro-
ceedings and have not in any way been touched upon by the Order.
When indicating interim measures the Court must only take into account
whether, if action is taken by one of the Parties pending the judicial
proceedings, there is likelihood of irremediable damage to the rights
which have been claimed before it and upon which it would have to
adjudicate. It follows therefore that a vote for this Order cannot have
the slightest implication as to the validity or otherwise of the rights
protected by such Order or of the rights claimed by a coastal State
dependent on the fish stock of its continental shelf or of a fishery zone.
Those substantive questions have not been prejudged at al1since the Court ,f) le Gouverriement du Royaume-Uni communique au Gouverne-
ment islandais et au Greffe de la Cour tous renseignements utiles,
les décisions publiées et les arrangements adoptés en ce qui
concerne le contrôle et la réglementation des prises de poisson
dans la région.
2) A moins qu'elle n'ait auparavant rendu son arrêtdéfinitif en l'affaire,
la Cour réexaminera la question en temps voulu, avant le 15 août
1973,à la demande de I'une ou l'autre Partie en vue de décider s'il y
a lieu de maintenir ces mesures, de les modifier ou de les rapporter.
Fait en anglais et en français, le texte anglais faisant foi, au palais de
la Paix, à La Haye, le dix-sept août mil neuf cent soixante-douze, en
quatre exemplaires, dont l'un restera déposéaux archives de la Cour et
dont les autres seront transmis respectivenient au Gouveriiement de la
République d'Islande, au Gouvernement du Royaume-Uni de Grande-
Bretagne et d'Irlande du Nord et au Secrétaire généralde l'organisation
des Nations Unies pour transmission au Conseil de sécurité.
Le Président de la Cour,
(SignéZ )AFRULLK AHAN.
Le Greffier de la Cour,
('SignéS. AQUARONE.
M. AMMOUN V,ice-Président, et MM. FORSTE Rt JIMÉNEZ DE ARÉ-
CHAGA, juges, font la déclaration commune suivante:
Nous avons voté en faveur de I'ordonnance compte tenu du fait que
les problèmes graves du droit de la mer contemporain qui se posent en
l'espèce relèvent du fond, ne sont pas en cause au stade actuel de la
procédure et ne sont abordés en aucune façon par I'ordonnance. Lors-
qu'elle indique des mesures conservatoires. la Cour ne doit tenir compte
que d'un élément,à savoir si les mesures prises par I'une des Parties alors
qu'une instance est pendante iisquent de porter un préjudiceirrémédiable
aux droits qui sont revendiquésdevant la Cour, sur lesquels celle-ci serait
appelée à se prononcer. II s'ensuit qu'un vote en faveur de l'ordonnance
ne peut avoir la moindre incidence sur la validité ou l'absencede validité
des droits qu'elle vise à protégeni sur les droits revendiqués par un
Etat riverain tributaire des réserves de poissons de son plateau con-
tinental ou d'une zone de pêche.Ces questions de fond ne sont aucune-will, if it declares itself competent, examine them, after affording the
Parties the opportunity of arguing their cases.
Judge PADILLA NERVO appends a dissenting opinion to the Order of the
Court.
(lnitialled)Z. K.
(Initiulled)S. A. COMPÉI ENCE PÊCHERIES (ORDONNANCE 17 Vlll 72) 19
ment préjugéespuisque la Cour les examinera le cas échéantsi elle sc
déclare compétente, après avoir donné aux Parties l'occasion de faire
valoir leurs arguments.
M. PADILLA NERVOj,uge, joint à l'ordonnance l'exposéde son opinion
dissidente.
(Paraphe) Z. K.
(Paraphé)S. A.
Provisional Measures
Order of 17 August 1972