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.
|Published (Last):||25 November 2017|
|PDF File Size:||14.85 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||10.82 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The objection based on this article must therefore also be overruled. This view of the matter, which is in conformity with the general character of an international tribunal which, in principle, has cognizance only of interstate relations, is indicated with peculiar force in this case for the specific reason that the Geneva Convention, with its very elaborate system of legal remedies, has created or maintained for certain categories of private claims arbitral tribunals of a special international character, such as the Upper Silesian Arbitral Tribunal and the German-Polish Mixed Arbitral Tribunal.
Presentations on the work of the Court. As between Germany and Poland this applies in respect of any question of law in dispute between them. Done in French and English, the French text being authoritative, at the Peace Palace, The Hague, this thirteenth day of September nineteen hundred and twenty-eight, in three copies, one of which is to be placed in the archives of the Court, and the others to be forwarded to the Agents of the applicant and respondent Parties respectively.
Collection of Judgments Series B: The Court cannot therefore award the money to Germany without further comment and without considering the question whether the German State can in law make free disposition of the amount of the indemnity as owner, and without the legal obligation to pay it to the parties dispossessed.
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.
Series A: Collection of Judgments (1923-1930)
If it were a question of an expert report on a purely mathematical basis, such as the drawing up of a balance sheet prepared from accounts, experts appointed by the Court and by the Parties—working entirely independently and with no liaison with the Court, on a footing of equality amongst themselves and authorized to obtain any information—would doubtless be of afctory assistance in arriving vhorzow a just settlement of the matter. In this case these are the Bayerische and Oberschlesische, and the Respondent has contended, among other things, that the Oberschlesische was not the owner of the lands and buildings which were entered in its name in the land register, from January,until this entry was vacated, inin accordance with the Polish law of In regard to the Oberschlesische and Bayerische jointly:.
But this is not the case as regards the submission in question. Tell us about a decision. As, however, the Court, in Judgment No.
Case Note on The Chorzow Factory ( Germany v Poland, ) | Law Help BD
If the Court were to deny the existence of a damage on the ground that the factory did not belong to the Oberschlesische, it would be contradicting one of the reasons on which it based its Judgment No. Print Save Cite Email Share. If she succeeded in establishing her claim before such other tribunal, the result would simply be faftory Poland would in the future regain what she has to pay now.
Government may be set down as under: As regards the Bayerische: This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. This is precisely what the Court said in Judgment No. First of all, the court acted interpreting the Geneva Convention, where the parties agreed to come before the court on any violation of the convention.
The question before fxctory court was whether Poland can be made liable for such violation of an international agreement. On May 14th,the Bayerische brought an action against the Reich, claiming that the latter was bound to compensate the Company for the damage said to have been suffered by it, owing to certain alleged shortcomings with respect to the fulfilment of the contract of March 5th,and the additional contracts.
Dissenting Opinion by M. Ehrlich.
Incidentally, that decision was given in accordance with the terms of the German Code of Civil Procedure which is in force in Polish Upper Silesia, and therefore, having been rendered by default, does not factpry a statement of the grounds on which it is based.
The price realized in the event of a sale of the shares was in the first place to be devoted to the liquidation of the balance of the Reich’s claim. Which is the fifth reasoning with adequate logic facory Where the indemnity amount is concerned the court give its reasoning, is the sixth consistent point.
The only point which might be disputed is the question whether, for the chorziw of this article of the Rulesthe conditions respecting forms and times must also be fulfilled, or whether it is enough that the material conditions should be fulfilled.
As guarantee for the sums due to the Reich under the contract, the Treuhand undertook to obtain for the Reich a lien on all the shares of the Oberschlesische.
Three fundamental questions arise: And should the contents of the registers not be in accordance with the real situation at law, the interested Party may, under paragraphcall upon the person entered to have the entry rectified…. It is impossible, therefore, to say whether it accepts the view of, the German Government according to which xhorzow may be inferred that such jurisdiction exists under the Convention: As regards the Oberschlesische:.
The caze of export asked for by the German Government cannot therefore be granted, or the same compensation would be awarded twice over.
Article 23 of the Geneva Convention only contemplates differences of opinion respecting the interpretation and application of Articles 6 to 22 of the Geneva Convention arising between the two Governments. Nyholm Order made on 13 September Annex. On the other hand, the reparation of the loss caused, for instance, by the destruction of a house—whether the person concerned be owner, tenant, or owner of a property in favour of which a servitude exists—, would only cover the value of the rights of the particular person, excluding the rights of every other person.
The Agent for the Polish Government disputed the German Government’s right to make this change at that stage of the proceedings and refused to accept it. From what precedes it results that the claims must indeed be granted to the German Government in name, but only as mandatory for the Companies.
It would be difficult to conceive a clearer case of control by the Reich chorzoow that of a company of which all the shares, and bearer shares at that, remained in the hands of the Reich which had all the rights of a chotzow in perpetuity, subject only to the possibility of sale if it saw fit, in which case it would receive practically the whole sale price, these rights of the Reich being limited only by a contractual obligation to maintain in certain hands, and for a certain time, the management of the works owned by the Company.
Divorce in Hindu Law in Bangladesh. The Agent for the German Government argued in his address to the Court that a government may content itself with reparation in any form which it may consider proper, and that reparation need not necessarily consist in the compensation of the individuals concerned.
The Armistice Convention appears to have been cited in order to reserve the possibility of getting the sale of the factory to the Oberschlesische declared invalid by means of an action to be brought to that end by the States signatory to that Convention.
Like now to Get update. The Reich was authorized itself to exercise all the rights resulting from the possession chorzoow the shares, and in particular the right to vote cborzow the general meeting of shareholders, but agreed that the management of the exploitation of the Oberschlesische should be left in the hands of the Bayerische.
Now it is certain that the moment of the contract of sale and that of the negotiations with the Genevese Company belong to a period of serious economic and monetary crisis ; the difference between the value which the undertaking then had and that which it would have had at present may therefore be very considerable. Even if the Court had dealt with this question, it would only have dealt with it as with an incidental and preliminary point ; consequently, even if the Court had decided the point, 192 decision would not have the force of res judicata; a fortioriit is impossible to argue that because the Respondent did not raise this incidental and preliminary point, it was thereby debarred from ever raising it.
In the judgment the expressions vary: 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.
Here’s an example of what they look like: Acts and Documents concerning the organization of the Court Series Caase In any case, it is certain that it has not withdrawn its claim and that, consequently, it wishes the Court to give judgment on the submission in question. But the Court has already had occasion to state that it can take no account of declarations, admissions or proposals which the Parties may have made during direct negotiations between them.
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. I am trying to get a property by giving an amount This judgment was the source of developments tending in two different directions.