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.
|Genre:||Health and Food|
|Published (Last):||17 July 2017|
|PDF File Size:||14.81 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||2.7 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Factoyr herself objected in connection with the second submission of the German Application of May 15th,that the entry of the Oberschlesische in the land register was in any case not valid as it was based on a fictitious and fraudulent transaction and thus caused the Court to deal with this point. Yet the Court did decide in Judgment No. Nyholm Opinion by M. In regard to these negotiations, it is only necessary here to note that, on January 14th,the German Government had recognized that the factory could no longer be restored in kind and that consequently the reparation due must, in principle, take the form of the payment of compensation, a statement which is moreover formally repeated in the Case.
You can filter on reading intentions from the listas well as view them within your profile.
The fact that the passages in question in Judgment No. This possibility 128 more particularly be considered when, as in the present case, the factory was built by the State in order to meet the imperious demands of public necessity and under exceptional circumstances such as those created by the war.
Dissenting Opinion by M. Ehrlich.
I am trying to get a property by giving an amount Schucking Annex 1 Annex 2. For its part the German Government, though basing the Court’s jurisdiction on the Locarno Convention, seems above all anxious that the Court should give judgment on this submission in the course of the present proceedings. And, if there was omission. The value of the Bayerische’s option on the factory depended also on the value of the undertaking.
If therefore the Polish Government considered that the contract of was fictitious, why did it not resort to the legal remedy afforded by the Civil law in force? Public International Law Section: What would have been the financial results, expressed in Reichsmarks current at the present time profits or losseswhich would probably have been given by the undertaking thus constituted from July 3rd,to the date of the present judgment, if it had been in the hands of the said Companies?
If the shareholder were not identical with the Reich, he had never obtained and could never obtain from the factory any profit except that which the Reich, in the exercise of its rights at the general meeting of shareholders, chose to grant him. Poland would factoey liable to repair any loss suffered by the Germany due to the forfeit of that two company as they violated that international agreement.
Please log in choezow set a read status. Ehrlich, National Judge, declaring that they cannot concur in the judgment of the Court and availing themselves chorzoa the right conferred on them by Article 57 of the Statutehave delivered the separate opinions which follow hereafter.
Accordingly the declarations of the Applicant in the present proceedings must be construed in the light of this conception and this method must also have been followed even if that Party had not stated its contention as explicitly as it has done in the German Agent’s address to the Court.
In reality, the German Government asks the Court for a decision of principle the effect of which would be either to prevent the set-off, of any counterclaim against the indemnity fixed in the judgment to be given by the Court, or, alternatively, only to allow such set-off in certain defined circumstances.
Tell us about a decision. Such for instance would be the case if the claim put forward against the claim on the score of reparation was in dispute and was to lead to proceedings which would in any case have resulted in delaying the entry into possession by the person concerned of the compensation awarded to him.
Moore Dissenting Opinion by M. A precise indication of the Applicant’s position is not to be found in the judgment. This agreement cannot, in fact, be construed as meaning that cnorzow factory should remain inoperative or be adapted to some other purpose, if the reparation contemplated did not include, in addition to a pecuniary indemnity, the prohibition of export sought for.
Series A: Collection of Judgments () | International Court of Justice
The only point which might be disputed is the question whether, for the application of this article of the Rulesthe conditions respecting forms and times xase also be fulfilled, or whether it is enough that the material conditions should be fulfilled.
The necessary lands were to be acquired on behalf of the Reich and entered in its name in the land register.
II definitely affirms that a declaration of the ownership of the Oberschlesische had been made in Judgment No. It is moreover very doubtful whether, apart from any other consideration, prohibition of exploitation is admissible under the Geneva Conventionthe object of which is to provide for the maintenance of industrial undertakings, and which, for this purpose, even permits them, in exceptional cases, to be expropriated Article 7.
This applies more especially as regards the German submission No. The Treuhand might at any time pay the whole or a part of the capital and interest and, if a part of the purchase price were refunded, shares of a nominal value corresponding to the payment would be released from the lien, whereas the reduction of the capital sum by the payment of the profits of the Oberschlesische would liberate no shares from the lien. This is precisely what the Court said in Casf No. It bring the general concept of law casd every violation of an engagement involves an obligation reparation.
In the Case this submission is worded as follows: