CHORZOW FACTORY CASE 1928 PDF
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):||9 December 2018|
|PDF File Size:||15.28 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||6.88 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Again it chorozw from the documents submitted to the Court by the Parties that the Reparation Commission does not claim to be competent to decide whether any particular property is or is not acquired by a succession State under the said article.
If husband wants to divorce???
It seems that the problem may be solved in accordance with the following considerations. 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.
Chorzow Factory Case (Merits) (PCIJ , Ser. A, No. 17) | University College London
In the light of the results of this investigation, it will then proceed to consider the submissions made in the course of the written and oral proceedings. The Agent for the German Government argued in his address to the Court casf 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 chorzoa individuals concerned. Such an entry merely establishes that the rules of the commercial code have not; been infringed in the formation of the Company.
As the Court has expressly declared in Judgment No. The Applicant having calculated the amount of the reparation claimed on the basis of the damage suffered by the two Companies as fatcory result of the Polish Government’s attitude, it is necessary for the Court to ascertain whether these Companies have in fact suffered damage as a consequence of that attitude.
Order, Merits Previous Procedural Stage s: In the documents there is indeed no trace of the existence of a mandate conferring on the German State the right to. It is, however, not necessary for the Court to go into this question. This is also the case as regards the position of the Reich as chorrzow.
Declarations recognizing the jurisdiction of the Court as compulsory. Your reading intentions are also stored in your profile for future facfory.
For it would follow that, contrary to what the Court has laid down in Judgment No. In regard to the Oberschlesische.
Rights or interests of an individual the violation of which rights causes damage are always in a different plane to rights belonging to a State, which rights may also chlrzow infringed by the same act. On the contrary, if a liquid and undisputed claim is put forward against the reparation claim, it is not easy to see why a factorj of set-off based on this demand should necessarily prejudice the effectiveness of the reparation.
Notice of this action was served on the respondent Government on. Sign in via your Institution. The articles of a joint stock company are, from a legal point of view, only a contract of private law, which, 198 to the commercial code, must be entered in the commercial register.
Chorzow Factory Case by Kirstin dela Cruz on Prezi
These two points are res judicata: The appropriate interpretation were made by PCIJ in every point, such as the interpretation of Article 36 of the Statute of the Court to justify its jurisdiction . Without entering into this discussion and without denying the importance which the question of cost of construction may have in determining the value of the undertaking, the Court merely observes that it is by no means impossible that the cost of construction of a factory may not correspond to the value which that factory will have when built.
Leave a Reply Cancel reply. It must be remembered that the Treuhand was a limited liability company whose obligations would not therefore involve obligations on the part of the companies which formed it. Print Save Cite Email Share. If the contract of December 24th,is to be regarded as genuine and effective, the Polish Government holds that, in order to determine the indemnity which may be due to the Oberschlesische, the rights of the Reich must first be eliminated ; and as it is of opinion that this can only be done in one way, namely, by the handing over by Germany to Poland of the shares of the Oberschlesische to the nominal value of no million marks, the Polish Government has in regard to this point made the following submission No.
On the other hand, the Reich was always, in all circumstances, to remain holder of the shares Inhaber of the Inhaberaktien until the moment when it decided to alienate them. For this reason it may well determine to whom the payment shall be made, in what place and at what moment ; in a lump sum or maybe by instalments ; where payment shall be made ; who shall bear the costs, etc. A04 Interpretation of Judgment No. The first of its submissions, throughout all stages of the proceedings, aims at the establishment of an obligation to make reparation.
Series A: Collection of Judgments (1923-1930)
The Court, having been of opinion that the Oberschlesische’s right to the Chorzow factory justified the conclusion that the Facrory Government’s attitude in respect of that Company was not in conformity fase Article 6 and the following articles of the Geneva Conventionmust necessarily maintain that opinion when the same situation at law has to be considered for the purpose of giving judgment in regard to the reparation claimed as a result of the act which has been declared by the Court not to be in conformity with the Convention.
It would seem, however, that the said Government contends that, in view of the right which the States signatory to the Armistice Cchorzow may have to oppose the sale of the factory and in view of the right of the Reparation Commission to ensure the discharge chodzow reparation debts in general and especially in view of the right csae to it under ArticlePoland’s obligation to pay to Germany an indemnity in favour of the Oberschlesische is dependent on the previous approval of the said States and of the Reparation Commission.
Observation of similar cases undertook by Permanent Court of International justice. Court in thinking, that the Polish Government would wish to put forward, against a judgment of the Court, claims which it may have thought fit to raise during friendly negotiations which the Parties intended should lead to a compromise.
Please log in to set a read status. It held that effect could not be given to the request fadtory the German Government, since it was to be regarded as designed to obtain not the indication of measures of protection, but judgment chofzow favour of a part of the claim formulated in the Application of February 8th, In order to reason the compensation declared was also justified by Article 6special by Article 7 of Cqse Convention and by its interpretation.
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. Here’s an example of what they look like: