13th, CASE CONCERNING THE FACTORY AT CHORZÓWTHE IV. of the proceedings in the various cases concerning the Chorzów factory. The Chorzow Factory Case (, Germany v Poland.) Principle: It is a general principle of law as well as International law, that any breach of agreement. T H E FA C T O R Y AT C H O R Z O W (G E R M A N Y v.P O L A N D) 13 Sept. P.C.I.J. (ser. A) No. 17 TOPIC: Cases on Gener.

Author: Mazukinos Akinokazahn
Country: Ghana
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Business
Published (Last): 23 June 2016
Pages: 326
PDF File Size: 6.3 Mb
ePub File Size: 7.95 Mb
ISBN: 721-2-76685-528-5
Downloads: 33172
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Vijar

Again it appears from the documents submitted to the Court by the Parties that the Reparation Commission does not claim to be competent to decide whether any particular property is or is not acquired by a succession State under the said article. The following passage should especially be noted:. Such an argument seems hardly reconcilable with the fundamental principles of the Court’s jurisdiction, which is limited to cases specially provided for in treaties and conventions in force.

Chorzow Factory Case by Kirstin dela Cruz on Prezi

Applicable International Laws 20 Dec, In the Case this submission is worded as follows: On the other hand, the Reich was always, in all circumstances, to remain holder of the shares Inhaber of the Inhaberaktien until the moment when it decided to alienate them. And further, in fact, it meets with great difficulties. In regard to the Tactory. But there is nothing—either in the terms of Article 23 or in the relation between this provision and certain others of a jurisdictional character included in the Geneva Convention —which tends to show that the jurisdiction cae by Article 23 extends to chorzw other than that due by one of the contracting Parties to the other in consequence of an infraction of Articles 6 to 22duly recognized as such by the Court.


Aditya Books,p 34 [10] International Criminal Court.

Series A: Collection of Judgments () | International Court of Justice

As the Court has expressly declared in Judgment No. Your reading intentions are private to you and will not be shown to other users. After adding that larger payments in liquidation of the debt would be permissible at any time, the contract proceeded: Facctory 16th, ; but the case was withdrawn in Juneat the same time as the action brought by the Oberschlesische and in the same circumstances.

In my opinion the decision is very satisfactory as and it could not be any better. It is impossible to take as the date of assessment a date subsequent to dispossession, unless it were the fault of the Respondent that the claim could not be brought earlier before the international tribunal. Sign in with your library vase. Moreover, there is nothing to justify the.

A04 Casd of Judgment No. In these circumstances, the Court can only observe that the damage alleged to have resulted from competition is insufficiently proved.

Case Note on The Chorzow Factory ( Germany v Poland, 1928)

The articles of a joint stock company are, from a legal point of view, only a contract of private law, which, according to the commercial code, must be entered in the commercial register. As regards the Oberschlesische and Bayerische jointly:.


In the documents there is indeed no trace of the existence of a mandate conferring on the German State the right to.

Whether there was any violation of the agreement between Germany and Poland or not? Oda Dissenting Opinion by M.

If the reparation consists in the payment caxe a sum of money, the Court may therefore determine the method of such payment. And, if there was omission.

International court decisions Product: For seeing that, under the contract of December 24th,the Reich had declared that it agreed to leave the.

Dissenting Opinion by M. Ehrlich.

I am trying to get a property by giving an amount Order, Merits Previous Procedural Stage s: The Agent for the Polish Government, however, in his speech on June 25th, said that, not being acquainted with the contracts and being entirely unable to form an opinion as to whether the summaries in question contained all the data necessary for accurate calculations, he formally objected to the said summaries being taken as a basis in the present proceedings.

It was on the basis, amongst other things, of the purely interstate character of the dispute decided by Judgment No. The first of its submissions, throughout all stages of the proceedings, aims at the establishment of an obligation to make reparation.

There is neither in the operative part nor anywhere else in Judgment No.