Culminated
OVERVIEW OF THE CASE
The Court was asked to settle a dispute as to sovereignty over two plots of land situated in an area where the Belgo-Dutch frontier presented certain unusual features, as there had long been a number of enclaves formed by the Belgian commune of Baerle-Duc and the Netherlands commune of Baarle-Nassau. A Communal Minute drawn up between 1836 and 1841 attributed the plots to Baarle- Nassau, whereas a Descriptive Minute and map annexed to the Boundary Convention of 1843 attributed them to Baerle-Duc. The Netherlands maintained that the Boundary Convention recognized the existence of the status quo as determined by the Communal Minute, that the provision by which the two plots were attributed to Belgium was vitiated by an error, and that Netherlands sovereignty over the disputed plots had been established by the exercise of various acts of sovereignty since 1843. After considering the evidence produced, the Court, in a Judgment delivered on 20 June 1959, found that sovereignty over the two disputed plots belonged to Belgium.
This overview is provided for information only and in no way involves the responsibility of the Court.
Institution of proceedings
Written proceedings
Oral proceedings
Minutes of the Public Hearings held at the Peace Palace, The Hague, from 27 April to 5 May and on 20 June 1959, the President, Mr. Klaestad, presiding
Available in:
Other documents
27 April 1959
Available in:
Orders
Judgments
Available in:
Summaries of Judgments and Orders
Press releases
29 November 1957
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands files a special agreement by which the Netherlands and Belgium submit a dispute to the Court
Available in:
14 April 1959
Sovereignty over Certain Frontier Land - The hearings will begin on April 27th, 1959
Available in:
23 April 1959
Sovereignty over Certain Frontier Land - Representatives of the Parties at the hearings
Available in:
23 April 1959
Sovereignty over Certain Frontier Land - Hearing of April 27th, 1959
Available in:
28 April 1959
Sovereignty over Certain Frontier Land - Hearings of April 28th, 1959
Available in:
29 April 1959
Sovereignty over Certain Frontier Land - Hearings of April 29th, 1959
Available in:
1 May 1959
Sovereignty over Certain Frontier Land - Hearings of May 1st, 1959
Available in:
2 May 1959
Sovereignty over Certain Frontier Land - Hearing of May 2nd, 1959
Available in:
4 May 1959
Sovereignty over Certain Frontier Land - Hearing of May 4th, 1959
Available in:
5 May 1959
Sovereignty over Certain Frontier Land - Hearing of May 5th, 1959
Available in:
18 June 1959
Sovereignty over Certain Frontier Land - The Court will read its Judgment on Saturday, June 20th, 1959
Available in:
Correspondence
OVERVIEW OF THE CASE
This case arose out of the incident which was the subject of the proceedings in the case concerning the Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (Israel v. Bulgaria). The aircraft destroyed by Bulgarian anti-aircraft defence forces was carrying several United States nationals, who all lost their lives. Their Government asked the Court to find Bulgaria liable for the losses thereby caused and to award damages. Bulgaria filed preliminary objections to the Court’s jurisdiction, but, before hearings were due to open, the United States informed the Court of its decision, after further consideration, not to proceed with its application. Accordingly, the case was removed from the List by an Order of 30 May 1960.
This overview is provided for information only and in no way involves the responsibility of the Court.
Institution of proceedings
Written proceedings
3 September 1959
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
3 April 2017
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
Orders
Fixing of time-limit: Written Statement of observations and submissions on Preliminary Objections
Available in:
Extension of time-limit: Written Statement of observations and submissions on Preliminary Objections
Available in:
Removal from the list
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections,Discontinuance
Available in:
Press releases
29 October 1957
The United States Government files an Application instituting proceedings against the People's Republic of Bulgaria
Available in:
20 May 1958
Aerial incident of 27 July 1955 (United States of America v. Bulgaria) - Extension of the time-limits for the filing of the pleadings
Available in:
11 September 1959
Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (United States of America v. Bulgaria) - The Government of Bulgaria files in the Registry Preliminary Objections to the Court's jurisdiction
Available in:
21 March 1960
Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (United States of America v. Bulgaria) - The hearings of the Objections will begin on June 1st, 1960
Available in:
19 May 1960
Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (United States of America v. Bulgaria) - The Agent of the Government of the United States advises the Court that his Government desires to discontinue the proceedings
Available in:
Correspondence
OVERVIEW OF THE CASE
This case arose out of the destruction by Bulgarian anti-aircraft defence forces of an aircraft belonging to an Israeli airline. Israel instituted proceedings before the Court by means of an Application in October 1957. Bulgaria having challenged the Court’s jurisdiction to deal with the claim, Israel contended that, since Bulgaria had in 1921 accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the Permanent Court of International Justice for an unlimited period, that acceptance became applicable, when Bulgaria was admitted to the United Nations in 1955, to the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice by virtue of Article 36, paragraph 5, of the present Court’s Statute, which provides that declarations made under the Statute of the PCIJ and which are still in force shall be deemed, as between the parties to the present Court’s Statute, to be acceptances applicable to the International Court of Justice for the period which they still have to run and in accordance with their terms. In its Judgment on the preliminary objections, delivered on 26 May 1959, the Court found that it was without jurisdiction on the ground that Article 36, paragraph 5, was intended to preserve only declarations in force as between States signatories of the United Nations Charter, and not subsequently to revive undertakings which had lapsed on the dissolution of the PCIJ.
This overview is provided for information only and in no way involves the responsibility of the Court.
Institution of proceedings
Written proceedings
4 December 1958
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
3 February 1959
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
Oral proceedings
Minutes of the Public Hearings held at the Peace Palace, The Hague, from 16 March to 3 April and 26 May 1959, the President, Mr. Klaestad, presiding
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
Orders
Fixing of time-limit: Written Statement of observations and submissions on Preliminary Objections
Available in:
Judgments
Preliminary Objections (including the text of the declaration of Judge Zafrulla Khan)
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
Summaries of Judgments and Orders
Press releases
17 October 1957
The Government of Israel files an Application instituting proceedings against the People's Republic of Bulgaria
Available in:
10 February 1959
Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (Israel v. Bulgaria) - The hearings will begin on March 16th, 1959
Available in:
9 March 1959
Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (Israel v. Bulgaria) - Representatives of the Parties at the hearings which will begin on March 16th, 1959
Available in:
16 March 1959
Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (Israel v. Bulgaria) - Hearing of March 16th, 1959
Available in:
17 March 1959
Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (Israel v. Bulgaria) - Hearings of March 17th, 1959
Available in:
18 March 1959
Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (Israel v. Bulgaria) - Hearings of March 18th, 1959
Available in:
19 March 1959
Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (Israel v. Bulgaria) - Hearing of March 19th, 1959
Available in:
23 March 1959
Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (Israel v. Bulgaria) - Hearings of March 23rd, 1959
Available in:
24 March 1959
Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (Israel v. Bulgaria) - Hearings of March 24th, 1959
Available in:
25 March 1959
Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (Israel v. Bulgaria) - Hearings of March 25th, 1959
Available in:
26 March 1959
Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (Israel v. Bulgaria) - Hearing of March 26th, 1959
Available in:
1 April 1959
Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (Israel v. Bulgaria) - Hearings of April 1st, 1959
Available in:
2 April 1959
Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (Israel v. Bulgaria) - Hearing of April 2nd, 1959
Available in:
3 April 1959
Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (Israel v. Bulgaria) - Hearings of April 3rd, 1959
Available in:
19 May 1959
Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (Israel v. Bulgaria) - The Court will read its Judgment on the Preliminary Objections on May 26th, 1959
Available in:
26 May 1959
Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (Israel v. Bulgaria) - Judgment (Preliminary Objections)
Available in:
Correspondence
OVERVIEW OF THE CASE
This case arose out of the destruction by Bulgarian anti-aircraft defence forces of an aircraft belonging to an Israeli airline which was the subject of the proceedings concerning the Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (Israel v. Bulgaria). The aircraft destroyed by Bulgarian anti-aircraft defence forces was carrying several nationals of the United Kingdom and colonies, who all lost their lives. The United Kingdom asked the Court to find Bulgaria liable for the losses thereby caused and to award damages. After filing a Memorial, however, the United Kingdom informed the Court that it wished to discontinue the proceedings in view of the decision of 26 May 1959 whereby the Court found that it lacked jurisdiction in the case brought by Israel.
This overview is provided for information only and in no way involves the responsibility of the Court.
Institution of proceedings
Written proceedings
28 August 1958
Available in:
Orders
Press releases
23 November 1957
The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland files an Application instituting proceedings against the People's Republic of Bulgaria
Available in:
28 May 1959
Aerial incident of 27 July 1955 (United Kingdom v. Bulgaria) - Extension of the time-limit for the deposit of the Counter-Memorial of the Government of Bulgaria
Available in:
18 August 1959
Aerial incident of 27 July 1955 (United Kingdom v. Bulgaria) - The case is removed from the Court's List
Available in:
Correspondence
OVERVIEW OF THE CASE
The Portuguese possessions in India included the two enclaves of Dadra and Nagar-Aveli which, in mid-1954, had passed under an autonomous local administration. Portugal claimed that it had a right of passage to those enclaves and between one enclave and the other to the extent necessary for the exercise of its sovereignty and subject to the regulation and control of India ; it also claimed that, in July 1954, contrary to the practice previously followed, India had prevented it from exercising that right and that that situation should be redressed. A first Judgment, delivered on 26 November 1957, related to the jurisdiction of the Court, which had been challenged by India. The Court rejected four of the preliminary objections raised by India and joined the other two to the merits. In a second Judgment, delivered on 12 April 1960, after rejecting the two remaining preliminary objections, the Court gave its decision on the claims of Portugal, which India maintained were unfounded. The Court found that Portugal had in 1954 the right of passage claimed by it but that such right did not extend to armed forces, armed police, arms and ammunition, and that India had not acted contrary to the obligations imposed on it by the existence of that right.
This overview is provided for information only and in no way involves the responsibility of the Court.
Institution of proceedings
Written proceedings
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
15 June 1956
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
24 February 2017
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
27 February 2017
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
27 February 2017
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
Oral proceedings
Minutes of the Public Hearings held at the Peace Palace, The Hague, from 23 September to 2 October and on 26 November 1957, the President, Mr. Hackworth, presiding
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
Minutes of the Public Hearings held at the Peace Palace, The Hague, from 21 September to 6 November 1959 and 12 April 1960, the President, Mr. Klaestad, presiding
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
Orders
Fixing of time-limit: Written Statement of observations and submissions on Preliminary Objections
Available in:
Extension of time-limit: Written Statement of observations and submissions on Preliminary Objections
Available in:
Extension of time-limits: Counter-Memorial, Reply and Rejoinder
Available in:
Judgments
Preliminary Objections (including the text of the declarations of Judges ad hoc Kojevnikov and Fernandes)
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
Merits
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
Summaries of Judgments and Orders
Press releases
23 December 1955
The Portuguese Republic files an Application instituting proceedings against the Republic of India
Available in:
15 March 1956
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India) - The Court fixes the time-limits for the filing of the first two pleadings
Available in:
16 April 1957
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India) - The Government of India files a Preliminary Objection to the Court's jurisdiction
Available in:
21 August 1957
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India) - The oral proceedings will open on Monday, September 23rd, 1957
Available in:
20 September 1957
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India) - Representatives of the Parties at the oral hearings
Available in:
23 September 1957
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India) - Hearing of September 23rd, 1957
Available in:
24 September 1957
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India) - Hearings of September 24th, 1957
Available in:
25 September 1957
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India) - Sittings of September 25th, 1957
Available in:
26 September 1957
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India) - Sittings of September 26th, 1957
Available in:
27 September 1957
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India) - Sittings of September 27th, 1957
Available in:
30 September 1957
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India) - Sittings of September 30th, 1957
Available in:
1 October 1957
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India) - Sittings of October 1st, 1957
Available in:
2 October 1957
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India) - Sittings of October 2nd, 1957
Available in:
3 October 1957
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India) - Sittings of October 3rd, 1957
Available in:
5 October 1957
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India) - Sitting of October 5th, 1957
Available in:
7 October 1957
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India) - Sittings of October 7th, 1957
Available in:
8 October 1957
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India) - Sitting of October 8th, 1957
Available in:
10 October 1957
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India) - Hearing of October 10th, 1957
Available in:
11 October 1957
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India) - Hearings of October 11th, 1957
Available in:
21 November 1957
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India) - The Court will deliver its Judgment on November 26th, 1957
Available in:
26 November 1957
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India) - Judgment
Available in:
20 February 1958
Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India) - Extension of the time-limits for the filing of the pleadings
Available in:
27 February 1959
Right of Passage over Indian Territory - The Court decides that the case will be heard after the judicial summer vacation
Available in:
28 May 1959
Right of Passage over Indian Territory - Beginning of the hearings on Monday, September 21st, 1959
Available in:
17 September 1959
Right of Passage over Indian Territory - Representatives of the Parties for the oral procedure in the second phase of the case, beginning on September 21st, 1959
Available in:
18 September 1959
Right of Passage over Indian Territory - Definite composition of the Parties' delegations
Available in:
21 September 1959
Right of Passage over Indian Territory - Hearing of September 21st 1959
Available in:
26 September 1959
Right of Passage over Indian Territory - Hearings of 21 to 26 September 1959
Available in:
3 October 1959
Right of Passage over Indian Territory - Hearings of 28 September to 3 October 1959
Available in:
7 October 1959
Right of Passage over Indian Territory - Hearings of 5 and 6 October 1959
Available in:
10 October 1959
Right of Passage over Indian Territory - Hearings of 9 and 10 October 1959
Available in:
17 October 1959
Right of Passage over Indian Territory - Hearings of 12 to 17 October 1959
Available in:
21 October 1959
Right of Passage over Indian Territory - Hearings of 19 to 21 October 1959
Available in:
24 October 1959
Right of Passage over Indian Territory - Hearing of 24 October 1959
Available in:
31 October 1959
Right of Passage over Indian Territory - Hearings of 26 to 31 October 1959
Available in:
7 November 1959
Right of Passage over Indian Territory - Hearings of 3 to 6 November 1959
Available in:
8 April 1960
Right of Passage over Indian Territory - The Court will read its Judgment on 12 April 1960
Available in:
Correspondence
OVERVIEW OF THE CASE
This overview is provided for information only and in no way involves the responsibility of the Court.
Institution of proceedings
Orders
Press releases
3 March 1954
Treatment in Hungary of Aircraft and Crew of United States of America (United States of America v. Hungarian People's Republic) - The United States file Applications instituting proceedings against Hungary and the USSR
Available in:
15 July 1954
Treatment in Hungary of Aircraft and Crew of United States of America (United States of America v. Hungarian People's Republic) - The case is removed from the Court's List
Available in:
Correspondence
OVERVIEW OF THE CASE
In 1942 the Government of the United States vested almost all the shares of the General Aniline and Film Corporation (GAF), a company incorporated in the United States, on the ground that those shares, which were owned by Interhandel, a company registered in Basel, belonged in reality to I.G. Farbenindustrie of Frankfurt, or that GAF was in one way or another controlled by the German company. On 1 October 1957, Switzerland applied to the Court for a declaration that the United States was under an obligation to restore the vested assets to Interhandel or, alternatively, that the dispute on the matter between Switzerland and the United States was one fit for submission for judicial settlement, arbitration or conciliation. Two days later Switzerland filed a Request for the indication of provisional measures to the effect that the Court should call upon the United States not to part with the assets in question so long as proceedings were pending before the Court. On 24 October 1957, the Court made an Order noting that, in the light of the information furnished, there appeared to be no need for provisional measures. The United States raised preliminary objections to the Court’s jurisdiction, and in a Judgment delivered on 21 March 1959 the Court found the Swiss application inadmissible, because Interhandel had not exhausted the remedies available to it in the United States courts.
This overview is provided for information only and in no way involves the responsibility of the Court.
Institution of proceedings
Written proceedings
3 October 1957
Procedure(s):Provisional measures
Available in:
11 October 1957
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
3 March 1958
Available in:
16 June 1958
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
20 September 1958
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
Oral proceedings
Minutes of the Public Sittings held at the Peace Palace, The Hague, on 12 and 14 October 1957, the Vice-President, Mr. Badawi, acting as President
Procedure(s):Provisional measures
Available in:
Minutes of the Public Sittings held at the Peace Palace, The Hague, from 5 to 17 November 1958, and on 21 March 1959, the President, Mr. Klaestad, presiding
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
Orders
Request for the indication of interim measures of protection (including the text of the declarations of Judges Hackworth, Read, Wellington Koo et Kojevnikov)
Procedure(s):Provisional measures
Available in:
Fixing of time-limit: Written Statement of observations and submissions on preliminary objections
Available in:
Judgments
Preliminary Objections (including the text of the declarations of Judges Basdevant, Kojevnikov, Judge ad hoc Carry, Zafrulla Khan)
Procedure(s):Preliminary objections
Available in:
Summaries of Judgments and Orders
Press releases
3 October 1957
The Swiss Confederation files an Application instituting proceedings against the United States of America
Available in:
4 October 1957
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - The Swiss Government files with the Registry a request for the indication of interim measures
Available in:
9 October 1957
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - The International Court of Justice fixes Saturday, October 12th, 1957, for the opening of the sittings
Available in:
10 October 1957
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Representatives of the Parties at the hearings which will begin on October 12th, 1957
Available in:
12 October 1957
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Sittings of October 12th, 1957
Available in:
14 October 1957
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Hearing of October 14th, 1957
Available in:
25 October 1957
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - The International Court of Justice finds that there is no need to indicate interim measures of protection
Available in:
16 January 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - The Swiss Confederation and the United States of America submit a joint application for an extension of the time-limits for the filing of the pleadings
Available in:
28 June 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - The Government of the United States files in the Registry Objections to the jurisdiction of the Court to adjudicate upon the Application submitted by the Government of the Swiss Confederation
Available in:
4 November 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Representatives of the Parties at the hearings which will begin on November 5th, 1958
Available in:
5 November 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Hearings of November 5th, 1958
Available in:
6 November 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Hearing of November 6th, 1958
Available in:
8 November 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Hearing of November 8th, 1958
Available in:
10 November 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Hearings of November 10th, 1958
Available in:
11 November 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Hearings of November 11th, 1958
Available in:
12 November 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Hearings of November 12th, 1958
Available in:
14 November 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Hearings of November 14th, 1958
Available in:
17 November 1958
Interhandel (Switzerland v. United States of America) - Hearings of November 17th, 1958
Available in:
16 March 1959
Interhandel - The Court will read its Judgment on the Preliminary Objections on Saturday, March 21st, 1959
Available in:
Correspondence
OVERVIEW OF THE CASE
The Swedish authorities had placed an infant of Netherlands nationality residing in Sweden under the régime of protective upbringing instituted by Swedish law for the protection of children and young persons. The father of the child, jointly with the deputy-guardian appointed by a Netherlands court, appealed against the action of the Swedish authorities. The measure of protective upbringing was, however, maintained. The Netherlands claimed that the decisions which instituted and maintained the protective upbringing were not in conformity with Sweden’s obligations under the Hague Convention of 1902 governing the guardianship of infants, the provisions of which were based on the principle that the national law of the infant was applicable. In its Judgment of 28 November 1958, the Court held that the 1902 Convention did not include within its scope the matter of the protection of children as understood by the Swedish law on the protection of children and young persons and that the Convention could not have given rise to obligations in a field outside the matter with which it was concerned. Accordingly, the Court did not, in this case, find any failure to observe the Convention on the part of Sweden.
This overview is provided for information only and in no way involves the responsibility of the Court.
Institution of proceedings
Written proceedings
29 November 1957
Available in:
29 March 1958
Available in:
25 August 1958
Available in:
Oral proceedings
Minutes of the Public Sittings held at the Peace Palace, The Hague, from September 25th to October 4th and on November 28th, 1958, the President, M. Klaestad, presiding
Available in:
Orders
Judgments
(including the text of the declarations of Judges Kojevnikov, Spiropoulos et Zafrulla Khan)
Available in:
Summaries of Judgments and Orders
Press releases
10 July 1957
The Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands files an Application instituting proceedings against the Government of the Kingdom of Sweden
Available in:
21 August 1957
Application of the Convention of 1902 Governing the Guardianship of infants (Netherlands v. Sweden) - The Court fixes the date of expiry of the time-limits for the filing of the first two pleadings
Available in:
27 August 1958
Application of the Convention of 1902 Governing the Guardianship of infants (Netherlands v. Sweden) - The hearings will begin on September 25th, 1958
Available in:
24 September 1958
Application of the Convention of 1902 Governing the Guardianship of infants (Netherlands v. Sweden) - Representatives of the Parties at the hearings
Available in:
25 September 1958
Application of the Convention of 1902 Governing the Guardianship of infants (Netherlands v. Sweden) - Hearing of September 25th, 1958
Available in:
26 September 1958
Application of the Convention of 1902 Governing the Guardianship of infants (Netherlands v. Sweden) - Sittings of September 26th, 1958
Available in:
29 September 1958
Application of the Convention of 1902 Governing the Guardianship of infants (Netherlands v. Sweden) - Hearing of September 29th, 1958
Available in:
30 September 1958
Application of the Convention of 1902 Governing the Guardianship of infants (Netherlands v. Sweden) - Sittings of September 30th, 1958
Available in:
1 October 1958
Application of the Convention of 1902 Governing the Guardianship of infants (Netherlands v. Sweden) - Sitting of October 1st, 1958
Available in:
3 October 1958
Application of the Convention of 1902 Governing the Guardianship of infants (Netherlands v. Sweden) - Hearings of October 3rd, 1958
Available in:
4 October 1958
Application of the Convention of 1902 Governing the Guardianship of infants (Netherlands v. Sweden) - Hearing of October 4th, 1958
Available in:
24 November 1958
Application of the Convention of 1902 Governing the Guardianship of infants (Netherlands v. Sweden) - The Court will read its Judgment on Friday, November 28th, 1958
Available in:
28 November 1958
Application of the Convention of 1902 Governing the Guardianship of infants (Netherlands v. Sweden) - Judgment
Available in:
Correspondence
OVERVIEW OF THE CASE
In this Advisory Opinion of 1 June 1956, the Court considered that it would be in accordance with its Advisory Opinion of 1950 on the international status of South West Africa for the Committee on South West Africa, established by the General Assembly, to grant oral hearings to petitioners on matters relating to the Territory of South West Africa if such a course was necessary for the maintenance of effective international supervision of the mandated Territory. The General Assembly was legally qualified to carry out an effective and adequate supervision of the administration of the mandated Territory. Under the League of Nations, the Council would have been competent to authorize such hearings. Although the degree of supervision to be exercised by the Assembly should not exceed that which applied under the Mandates System, the granting of hearings would not involve such an excess in the degree of supervision. Under the circumstances then existing, the hearing of petitioners by the Committee on South West Africa might be in the interest of the proper working of the Mandates System.
This overview is provided for information only and in no way involves the responsibility of the Court.
Request for Advisory Opinion
19 December 1955
Request for Advisory Opinion (including the dossier of documents transmitted to the Court pursuant to article 65, paragraph 2 of the Statute)
Available in:
Written proceedings
Oral proceedings
Minutes of the Public Sittings held at the Peace Palace, The Hague, on March 22nd and June 1st, 1956, the President, Mr. Hackworth, presiding
Available in:
Orders
Advisory opinions
Available in:
Summaries of Judgments and Orders
Press releases
23 December 1955
Admissibility of Hearings of Petitioners by the Committee on South West Africa - The General Assembly of the United Nations request an Advisory Opinion of the Court on the question
Available in:
9 March 1956
Admissibility of Hearings of Petitioners by the Committee on South West Africa - The Court postpones until March 22nd the opening of the hearings
Available in:
21 March 1956
Admissibility of Hearings of Petitioners by the Committee on South West Africa - Representatives of the Government of the United Kingdom at the public sitting which will be held on March 22nd, 1956
Available in:
22 March 1956
Admissibility of Hearings of Petitioners by the Committee on South West Africa - Hearing of March 22nd, 1956
Available in:
30 May 1956
Admissibility of Hearings of Petitioners by the Committee on South West Africa - The Court will deliver its advisory opinion on June 1st, 1956
Available in:
1 June 1956
Admissibility of Hearings of Petitioners by the Committee on South West Africa - Advisory opinion
Available in:
Correspondence
OVERVIEW OF THE CASE
The Statute of the Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organization (ILO) (the jurisdiction of which had been accepted by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) for the purpose of settling certain disputes which might arise between the Organization and its staff members) provides that the Tribunal’s judgments shall be final and without appeal, subject to the right of the Organization to challenge them. It further provides that in the event of such a challenge, the question of the validity of the decision shall be referred to the Court for an advisory opinion, which will be binding. When four UNESCO staff members holding fixed-term appointments complained of the Director-General’s refusal to renew their contracts on expiry, the Tribunal gave judgment in their favour. UNESCO challenged these judgments, contending that the staff members concerned had no legal right to such renewal and that the Tribunal was competent only to hear complaints alleging nonobservance of terms of appointment or staff regulations. In its Advisory Opinion of 23 October 1956, the Court said that an administrative memorandum which had announced that all holders of fixed-term contracts would, subject to certain conditions, be offered renewals might reasonably be regarded as binding on the organization and that it was sufficient to establish the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, that the complaints should appear to have a substantial and not merely artificial connection with the terms and provisions invoked. It was therefore the Court’s opinion that the Administrative Tribunal had been competent to hear the complaints in question.
This overview is provided for information only and in no way involves the responsibility of the Court.