Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T19:31:55.069Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Responsibility of the Successor State for War Debts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 April 2017

Hans J. Cahn
Hans J. Cahn*
Affiliation:
Ph.D. Pol. Sc, Dr. iur. dipt., Geneva Graduate Institute for International Studies
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is the unalterable fate and the inevitable risk of any debt that its value is closely connected with the fate and actions of the debtor whose assets are subject to the liability. This applies especially to the public debts of a belligerent state whose wealth and resources, and sometimes its very existence, are at stake. The domestic laws of almost every civilized country protect the creditor against the effects of legal changes and of non-remunerative mutations affecting all or an important portion of the property subject to the liability. This liability remains with the transferred property. To a certain extent it is legally vested in the person who succeeds to the property rights.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 44 , Issue 3 , July 1950 , pp. 477 - 487
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1950

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Department óf State Bulletin, Vol. 14 (1946), pp. 955, 1101, 1121. For references especially concerning the Swiss point of view in this matter, see M. Domke, The Control of Alien Property (1947), pp. 12, 279, 280.

2 Cf. Max Huber, Vie Staatensuksession (1898), and Ernst H. Feilchenfeld, Public Debts and State Succession (1931), both of whom refer to state practice; Edwin M. Borchard, The Diplomatic Protection of Citizens Abroad (1918), p. 202; Arthur Berriedale Keith, The Theory of State Succession (1907), p. 58; T. J. Lawrence, The Principles of International Law (4th ed., 1911), $497.

3 The principle that the benefit shall not pass without the burden is based upon equity; it is stressed by the authors in different versions: Cf. Gilbert Gidel, Des effets des annexions sur leg concessions (1904), p. 82; Paul Guggenheim, Beitrage ssur voelkerrechtlichen Lehre vom Staatenwechsel (1925), p. 42; Oppenheim-McNair-Lauterpacht,International Law (6th ed., 1940), Vol. I, p. 127; Hans Kelsen, Das Problem der Souveraenitaet nnd die Theorie des Voelkerrechts (1920), p. 172 et seq.; Anzilotti,Cor so di diritto internazionale (3rd ed., 1923), Vol I, p. 288 et seq.; Halleck, International Law (4th ed., 1908), p. 529; Report of Transvaal Concession Commission (Pari Papers South Africa, 1901, cmd. 623); decision in West Band Central Mining Co. v. King, [1905] 2 K. B. 391; Eduard Heilfron Kriegsschadenreeht, Vol. II (1918), p. 460; G. H. Hackworth, Digest of International Law (1940), Vol. I, p. 391 et seq.; Arrigo Cavaglieri, La dottrina della successione di Stato a Stato e it suo valore giuridico (1912), pp. 12-38; Schoenborn, Staatensuktsessionen (1913), pp. 7-9;Carre1 de Mahlberg, Contribution d la théorie générale de I‘Etat (1920), pp. 62-65;Orlando, Principii di diritto costitusionale (1920), p. 37; Pradier-Foderfi, Traits de droit international public Europien et AmSricain (1885), Vol. I, p. 279; Nicolas Politis, Les emprunts d’Etat en droit international (1894), p. 108; Lapradelle-Politis in Secueil des arbitrages internationaux, Vol. II, p. 555 et seq.; Appleton, Des effets des annexions de territoire sur les dettes de I‘Etat demembrS ou annexe” et sur celles des provinces, dipartements . . . annexes (1894), p. 32; G. 8. Freund, Vie Bechtsverhaeltnisse der oeffentlichen Anleihen (1907), p. 172 et seq.; Pierre Deseamps, “La dSfinition des droits acquis, sa portie ginirale et son application en matigre de succession d’Etat A Etat” in Revue ginSrale de droit international public, XV, pp. 385-400 (1908); Westlake, International Law (2nd ed.), p. 74; Hannis Taylor, A Treatise on International Public Law (1901), p. 201; Ludwig von Eogister, Zur Lehre von der Staatennachfolge (1903); Arnold Bennet Hall, Outlines of International Law (1915), p. 11 et seq.; Marques de Olivart, De los principios que regien la succession territorial en los eambios de soberania (1906), and the same in Tratado de derecho internacional publico (1903-1904), Vol. I, pp. 174, 177; Joseph Kohler, Grundlagen des Voelkerrechts (1918), p. 99; Gabba, Lo stato e il codice civile (1882), Vol. II, p. 364 et seq., p. 682. Also the analogies to certain principles of the civil law constitute tendencies of equity in international law. Thus, some other writers regard state succession as something analogous to private succession under the law of inheritance. See Fritz von Martens, Das Internationale Becht der zivilisierten Nationen (German edition, 1883), Vol. I, p. 278; Bonfils-Fauchille, Manuel de droit international public (8th ed., 1914), Vol. I, p. 343 et seq. The maintenance of public debts is founded on the application of the principles of unjust enrichment by Cavaglieri, op. cit., pp. 134-145; J6ze, Le portage des dettes publiques au cas de dimembrement du territoire (1921) ; Gilbert Gidel, op. cit.; Bivier,op. cit., Vol. I, p. 69; Appleton, op. cit., pp. 38-42; A. N. Sack, Les effets des transformations des Etats sur leurs dettes publiques (1927), Vol. I, p. 76 et seq.

4 Cf. Feilehenfeld, op. cit., $283, p. 591; Lippert, Bandbuch des Intemationalen Finanstrechts (1928, 2nd ed.) ; Beport of the Transvaal Concession Commission; Walter Schoenborn, Carre1 de Mahlberg, Orlando, Cavaglieri, Guggenheim, Kelsen, Bonflls-Fauchille, Politis, Anzilotti, Gidel, Oppenheim-McNair-Lauterpacht, see supra, note 3; Keith, loc. cit.

5 See Decision No. II of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the case of the Preferential Bights Claimed by the Blockading Powers from Venezuela (1904); Georg Schwarzenberger, International Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals (1945), Vol. I, p. 14.

6 See Guggenheim, op. cit., p. 95; Feilchenfeld, op. cit., J 283, p. 591; Hall, loc. cit.;Oppenheim, loc. cit.; Westlake, loc. cit.; Anzilotti, loc. cit.

7 Feilchenfeld, op. cit., § 349b, p. 719.

8 Cf. de Martens, Nouveau Beoueil des Traitis et Autres Actes Belatifs aux Rapports de Droit International, Vol. I, p. 365.

09 See the decisions of Italian tribunals cited by Feilchenfeld, op. cit., p. 215, note 117.

10 Cf. Martens, Nouveau Becueil GSnSral des TraitSs, Vol. XVII, 2, p. 474.

11 Cf. Hans J. Cahn, Das Kriegsschadenrecht der National, (1947), Bk. 2, § 123 b,p. 252, $ 139 c, p. 268 et seq.

12 See Prussian law of April 9, 1875, Cahn, op. cit.,Bb. 2, $ 139 e, p. 269.

13 Cf. arguments advanced during the negotiations at Paris, 55th Cong., 3rd Sess.,Senate Doc. No. 62, pt. 2, p. 50; L. von Bahr, “Die Icubanische StaatsschvXd” in Die Nation, Vol. XVI (1899), pp. 425-427, who generally approves those arguments.

14 ee Pari. Papers, 1900, VI, Cd. 426, p. 9, and Martens, Nouveau Becueil Gènèral des Traitès (2nd series), Vol. XXXII, p. 145.

15 Cf. Cahn, Kriegsschadenrecht, Bk. 2, $ 174, p. 313 et seq.

16 Cf. Report of the Transvaal Concession Commission, Pari. Papers, 1901, XXXV,Cd. 623

17 Published in Zeitschrift fuer Voellcerrecht, Vol. I, p. 93 et seq.

18 In his work, The Theory of State Succession with Special Reference to English and Colonial Law (1907).

19 Cf. “The Liabilities of a Conqueror” in The Law Magazine and Review, Vol.XXXVIII, p. 129.

20 See Termination of War and Treaties of Peace (1916), p. 43.

21 See The Law of Private Property in War (1907), p. 66.

22 Cf. “Observations” on the Conditions of Peace of May 28, 1919, in Comments by the German Delegation on the Conditions of Peace, p. 47; and Expert Opinion of the German Financial Delegation, p. 6.

23 See The Hungarian Peace Negotiations, published by the Hungarian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (1922), Vol. I I , p. 321.

24 Ibid., Part IX of the reply of the Allied and Associated Powers, in the Hungarian Peace Negotiations, Vol. I I , p. 557.

25 Cf. Reparation Commission, Annex 1510, p. 10.

26 Cf. Reparation Commission, Annex 1510.

27 Op. tit., $ 390, p. 786.

28 BG.Z., Vol. 108, p. 298.

29 § 1, subsec. 1, see Ferordnungsblatt des General Gouverneurs in Polen.

30 § l “Britte Durchfuehrungsverordnung zur Kriegssachschaden-Verordnung in den eingegliederten Ostgebieten,” Beichsgesetzblatt, 1942, Part I, p. 46.

31 §5, subsection 4, Deutsches Beichsgesetzblatt, 1941, Part I, p. 215.

32 § 5, SGBl., 1942, Part I, p. 446.

33 Ibid., p. 665.

34 Article 1, Amtsblatt der Serbisehen Ministerien, 1941, p. 941.

35 §24, subsection 2, Verordnmgsblatt fuer die besetsten norwegischen Gebiete, 1941,Abt. II, p. 200.

36 The exception of war debts is strongly opposed by Feilchenfeld, op. cit., § 349,p. 719; Lawrence, loo. cit.; Oppenheim, loc. cit.; Amos 8. Hershey, ” The Succession of States” in this JOURNAL, Vol. 5 (1911), p. 285; and Holtzendorff, Bandbuch des VoelTcerrechts (1887), Vol. I I , p. 33 et seq.