Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T18:26:49.707Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Treaty Stipulations in Favor of Third States

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2017

Eduardo Jiménez de Aréchaga
Eduardo Jiménez de Aréchaga*
Affiliation:
University of Montevideo, Uruguay
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Many recent and important treaties contain provisions in favor of third states. The United Nations Charter, for instance, confers upon non-member states the right to participate in the discussion of disputes in which they are involved (Article 32); the right to bring such disputes to the attention of the Security Council or the General Assembly (Article 35); and the right to consult the Security Council with regard to the solution of special economic problems arising from the application of preventive or enforcement measures (Article 50). Also Articles 2 (7) and 81 have been interpreted and applied as conferring rights upon states not Members of the Organization.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 50 , Issue 2 , April 1956 , pp. 338 - 357
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1956

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 Verdross, in 2 Comunita Internazionale 439 et seq. (1947).

2 See Arts. 109, 328, 332, 335, 358 (2), 374, 380 and 381 of the Versailles Peace Treaty.

3 See similar provisions in the Treaties of Peace with Italy (Art. 76), Bulgaria (Art. 28), Hungary (Art. 32) and Roumania (Art. 30), 42 A.J.I.L. Supp. at 59, 190, 212, 239, 264 (1948).

4 House of Representatives Report No. 1457, Settlement of Certain Finnish Claims (Oct. 18, 1949).

5 See Mensaje del Poder Ejecutivo, Pt. II, p. 43 (Montevideo, 1947).

6 H. Kelsen, Opinion concerning the claims of the Italian owners of the ship “Fausto,” 1950, p. 22 (typewritten).

7 Costa, Podestá, El derecho de angaria en el caso del vapor Fausto 15–20 (Montevideo, 1951).Google Scholar

8 Podestá Costa, Manual de Derecho Internacional Público, par. 157; Quintana, Moreno and Shaw, , Derecho Internacional Público 314–315 (Buenos Aires, 1950)Google Scholar; Salvioli, 46 Hague Recueil 29–30 (1933).

9 Art. 18 (b), Draft on Law of Treaties, Harvard Research in International Law. 29 A.J.I.L. Supp. 924 (1935).

10 Oppenheim, International Law, Vol. I, p. 833 (6th ed., 1947) ; Diena, ibid.; Brierly, 58 Hague Recueil 221 (1936); Verdross, op. cit. 446.

11 P.C.I.J. Publications, Series A/B, Nos. 22 and 46.

12 P.C.I.J. Publications, Series C, No. 17–1, Vol. I, pp. 339–340.

13 Loc. cit. 205.

14 Loc. cit. 407–408.

15 Publications of the Court, Series A, No. 22, p. 20.

16 Ibid.

17 Beckett, 39 Hague Recueil 179 (1932); Harvard Research, loc. cit. 932; Trémaud, Rev. Gén. Droit Int. Public, 1930, p. 507.

18 Loc. cit. 43.

19 Ibid. 38.

20 Ibid., Series A/B, No. 46, pp. 147–148.

21 Beckett, loc. cit. 181; Ripert, 44 Hague Recueil 595 (1933); Francoz, Rev. Droit Public, 1932, p. 743.

22 Loc. cit. 935–936.

23 Loc. cit. 143.

24 Loc. cit. 185.

25 The abrogation by Bismarck, with the agreement of Austria and over the protests of Denmark, of a stipulation in favor of Denmark made in the Treaty of Prague between Austria and Prussia; and an incidental statement of a League of Nations Committee of Jurists to the effect that Sweden, as a third party, could claim a right to the demilitarization of the Aaland Islands, “in so far as the contracting parties have not cancelled it.” Publications of the Court, Series C, No. 17–1, Vol. 1, p. 116.

26 This was the main line of argument made before the International Court by the Swiss Counsel, Professor Logoz. Loc. cit. 206.

27 “It may be difficult in a particular case to ascertain whether it was in fact the design of contracting States to create a benefit that should accrue to a third State, and which it might through an appropriate process claim irrevocably to be its own. It is perhaps reluctance to impute such a design to those parties rather than a denial of their ability to achieve such an objective that may cause the judicial mind at times to look askance at a conception of the law that would make it easy for a third State to gain such a privilege.” 2 Hyde, International Law 1467 (2nd ed., 1945).

28 See, however, Quintana and Shaw, op. cit. 314–315.

29 Op. cit. 446–447.

30 Kelsen, Principles of International Law 350 (1952).

31 Series C, loc. cit. 404.

32 Ibid. 405.

33 Cf. Verdross, 52 Hague Recueil 244 (1935).

34 Wunschik, , Die Wirkung der Völkerrechtlichen Verträge für dritte Staaten 39–40 (Bern, 1930)Google Scholar.

35 Enriques, Riv. dir. int., 1933, pp. 28–29.

36 Loc. cit. 1653.

37 Ibid. 116.

38 Series A, No. 22, p. 43.

39 De Page, Traité de Droit Civil, Vol. II, p. 607. Cf. Planiol, Traité de Droit Civil, Vol. II, par. 1234.

40 Law Revision Committee, Sixth Interim Report, p. 25 (Cmd. 5449).

41 Ibid. 26.

42 “Contracts for the Benefit of Third Persons,” 46 Law Quarterly Review 12 et seq.

43 Les Affréteurs etc., v. Walford, [1919] A.C. 801.

44 Series A, No. 7, p. 84.

45 Corbin, loc. cit. 12.

46 The Nature of the Judicial Process 99 (1921).

47 Secs. 133–147.

48 Cf. Ripert, 44 Hague Recueil 594–595 (1933).

49 Fitzmaurice, 73 Hague Recueil 359 (1948).

50 Anzilotti, Corso di Diritto Interaazionale 376.

51 Series A/B, No. 46, pp. 147–148.

52 Kelsen, Principles of International Law 349.

53 Loc. cit. 929. Cf. Cavaglieri, 26 Hague Recueil 528 (1929)

54 Cf. Rousseau, Principes Généraux du Droit International Public 464.

55 Fitzmaurice, Loc. cit. 360.

56 Ibid. In 1888 the United States, although not a party to the treaty, claimed directly from Belgium the right to free and unimpeded navigation through the Congo and Niger Rivers. Roxburgh, International Conventions and Third States 49–50.

57 Hyde, op. cit., Vol. I, pp. 93–98 and Hackworth, Digest of International Law, Vol. I, p. 103 et seq.

58 Hyde, op. cit., Vol. II, pp. 975–976, and Witenberg, Commission Mixte de Réclamations Germano-Américaines, Vol. II, p. 123.

59 Security Council, Official Records, 2nd Year, No. 74, p. 1920.

60 Series A, No. 22, pp. 36–37. Cf. Anzilotti, op. cit. 378–379; Rousseau, op. cit. 477; Scelle, Précis de Droit des Gens, Vol. II, p. 368.

61 For instance, Laurent, Principes de Droit Civil, Vol. XV, pars. 559 and 571.

62 De Page, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 622; and Planiol, op. cit., par. 1220.

63 Lambert, Ed., Du contrat à faveur des tiers (Paris, 1893)Google Scholar.

64 Anzilotti, op. cit. 380–381; Fitzmaurice, loc. cit. 360.

65 Harvard Research, loc. cit. 936.

66 In this case the Court referred to the necessity of the stipulation “being accepted as such.” The only act of acceptance by Switzerland submitted to the Court was the fact that it was at Switzerland’s request that the Free Zone of Gex was established. Series C, No. 17-1, Vol. I, p. 413.

67 Jenks, 69 Hague Recueil 485 (1939): “It is easily conceived that a right may be conferred on a third party without its assent and this is accepted by the majority of modern legal systems.”

68 Lambert, Op. cit. 109–110: “une rénonciation à la faculté de rénoncer.”

69 Sec. 137.

70 House of Representatives Report No. 1457, p. 16.

71 Ibid. 16.

72 Ibid.

73 Ibid. 14.

74 Ibid. 17.

75 Ibid. 7.

76 Ibid. 16. In support of this point of view, see 97 Univ. of Pa. Law Rev. 126–127 (1948).

77 Guillien, “Le statut du Canal de Suez,” in Etudes en l’honneur de Georges Seelle, La technique et les principes du droit public, Vol. II, p. 749.

78 Comment of the Harvard Research, loc. cit. 936.

79 Similarly, Art. 35 (2) of the Statute of the Court provides that the Security Council shall lay down the conditions under which the Court shall be open to states not parties to the Statute.

80 Judge Negulesco in his separate opinion in the Free Zones Case, loc. cit. 37. Cf. League of Nations Committee of Jurists in the Aaland Island question, League of Nations Official Journal, Spec. Supp. No. 3, October, 1920, p. 18.

81 Loc. cit. 935.

82 De Page, op. cit. 629–630, and 619.

83 The Nature of the Judicial Process 99–100.