Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T13:43:15.564Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Swiss Law and Practice in Relation to Measures of Execution against the Property of a Foreign State*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 July 2009

Jean-Flavien Lalive
Get access

Extract

At the present time there is no rule of law governing the question of immunity from jurisdiction and from execution in Switzerland. When the Federal Law on actions for debts and bankruptcy was being amended in 1949, the legislator had declined to legislate on this point.

Type
Articles
Information
Netherlands Yearbook of International Law , Volume 10 , December 1979 , pp. 153 - 166
Copyright
Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 1979

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. Feuille fédérale 1923 p. 428 et seq.

2. Feuille fédérale 1923 I p. 425.

3. See I Répertoire suisse de droit international public p. 354 et seq.Google Scholar

4. See Austrian Minister of Finance v. Dreyfus - Recueil des arrêts du Tribunal fédéral [Reports of the Federal Court] 44 I 49, hereafter abbreviated to ATF.

5. Austrian Minister of Finance v. Dreyfus, ATF 44 I 49.

6. VII Annuaire Suisse de droit international (ASDI) 1950 p. 47.

7. Recueil officiel des arrêts du Tribunal federal (Reports of the Federal Court decisions) ATF 56 I 237; Journal des tribunaux 1931, 142.

8. Cf., particularly the study by Günther, Dressier, “L'immunité de juridiction et d'exécution des Etats étiangers devant la juridiction nationale”, thesis, Geneva 1978.Google Scholar

9. Semaine judiciaire 61, 1939, 327.

10. Secke v. Austrian Federal Exchequer, 12 April 1940; cf., Gmür, loc.cit., p. 58; see also the 1956 decision in Kingdom of Greece v. Julius Bär & Co., ATF 82 I 75.

11. National Bank of Bulgaria v. Alcalay, 6 November 1931.

12. ASDI 1975 p. 219.

13. See in particular Gmür, loc.cit., VII ASDI 1950 p. 60.

14. ASDI 1976 p. 100 et seq.

15. Unpublished decision, Republic of Italy v. Beta Holding S.A., cf., below.

16. See in particular the judgment in Bovard-Binet v. Santiago City, Republic of Chile and Independent Redemption Fund for the Chilean Debt, decision of the Cour de justice civile, Geneva, 6 February 1940 - Gmür, loc.cit., p. 65.

17. See Guldener, , Interkantonales und Internationales Zivilprozessrecht, p. 5.Google Scholar

18. See Republic of Italy v. Beta Holding S.A.

19. ATF 86 I 23.

20. ATF 82 I 88/89.

21. ATF 44 I 49; 56 I 237 and 82 I 75.

22. Some passages from this can be found in XXXIII ASDI 1977 p. 163 et seq.

23. See United Arab Republic v. Mrs. X, ATF 86 I 29.

24. Cf., Caflisch, L., “La pratique suisse en matière de droit international public, 1974”, XXXI ASDI 1975, p. 219, no. 3.10.Google Scholar

25. ATF 44 I 49.

26. ATF 82 I 75.

27. See XXXIII ASDI 1977, p. 363 et seq,

28. State of Yugoslavia v. Sogerfin, Semaine judiciaire, 1939 pp. 327 et seq., 333; Greek Republic v. Walder, ATF 56 I pp. 237 et seq., 250.

29. ATF 82 I 75.

30. Recueil officiel des lois de la Confédération, 1974, p. 748.Google Scholar

31. RO 1973 p. 598.

32. RO 1973 p. 609.

33. RO 1973 p. 1790.

34. RO 1973 p. 2264.

35. RO 1948 p. 363.

36. “La Convention européenne sur I'immunité des Etats et son protocole additionnel”, XXXI ASDI 1975 p. 11 et seq.Google Scholar