Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T01:21:41.745Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

International Court of Justice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2009

Get access

Extract

Advisory Opinions

Interpretation of the Peace Treaties with Bulgaria, Hungary and Rumania: Early in May the Secretary-General (Lie) advised the International Court of Justice that neither Bulgaria, Hungary or Rumania had designated its representatives to the commissions provided in the treaties before the deadline of within thirty days from March 30. Therefore the United Kingdom and United States deposited their written statements within the time limit of June 5 for the second phase of the case.1 The two questions under consideration were: 1) “If one party fails to appoint a representative to a Treaty Commission under the Treaties of Peace with Bulgaria, Hungary and Rumania where that party is obligated to appoint a representative to the Treaty Commission, is the Secretary-General of the United Nations authorized to appoint the third member of the Commission upon the request of the other party to a dispute according to the provisions of the respective Treaties?” In the event of an affirmative reply to that question: 2) “Would a Treaty Commission composed of a representative of one party and a third member appointed by the Secretary-General of the United Nations constitute a Commission, within the meaning of the relevant Treaty articles, competent to make a definitive binding decision in settlement of a dispute?”

Type
International Organizations: Summary of Activities: I. United Nations
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 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 ICJ Communiqué 50/21, May 6, 1950; ibid., communiqué 50/23, June 6, 1950. For summary of first phase of the case, see International Organization, IV, p. 124,310.

2 ICJ Communiqué 50/25, June 23, 1950.

3 ICJ Communiqué 50/27, June 28, 1950. For MrFitzmaurice's, arguments, see International Organization, IV, p. 311Google Scholar.

4 ICJ Communiqué 50/26, June 27, 1950.

5 ICJ Communiqué 50/33, July 18, 1950.

6 New York Times, July 19, 1950.

7 ICJ Communiqué 50/22, May 12, 1950.

8 ICJ Communiqué 50/30, July 11, 1950.

9 ICJ Press Releases 53, 54, 55. For summary of the question of South-West Africa in the United Nations, see International Organization, I, p. 69–70; ibid., II, p. 72, 112; ibid., Ill, p. 73, 77–79, 133, 699; ibid., IV, p. 100–102.

10 ICJ Press Releases 56, May 19, 1950 and 57, May 20, 1950.

11 ICJ Press Releases, 58, May 20, 1950 and 59, May 22, 1950.

12 ICJ Communiqué 50/30, July 11, 1950.