Straddling both the centres of (European) power and the shifting dynamics of the post-Ottoman world in a quest to guarantee private rights through public international legal redress, the PCIJ Mavrommatis case provides a rich resource for interrogating the extent to which international law during the League period could speak for voices on the edge of empire. In this article, historical consideration of the regimes of empire and Mandate form the backdrop to an exploration into how international legal discourse (re)configured the relationship between the core and the periphery, especially for those peoples awaiting the promise of self-determination and sovereignty. The figure of a lone Greek investor and his dashed hopes in the newly created Palestine Mandate is the backdrop to this tail of ever-shifting interpretations of public and private rights, of speech as well as silence before and beyond the Peace Palace.

International lawyers, especially human rights lawyers, praise the Nationality Decrees decision as a watershed in the progressive expansion of international jurisdiction. Reexamination of the case challenges this understanding. The case proves to have involved a confrontation between rival colonial conceptions: French stress on the intimacy of an imperial tuteur with its protégés versus British focus on consent to subordination. Reexamination also reveals the decision as highly restrained, rejecting a French call for a judicially formulated colonial code. The case's protagonists bequeathed a conflicted conceptual legacy concerning international authority and nationality policy in whose wake debates about today's new internationalism follow. [Un protectorat] reste encore, à quelques égards tout au moins, au dehors, en marge, de façon qu'il y ait un dernier effort, un dernier acte à accomplir pour que ce territoire, qui reste nominalement, par une subtilité juridique, séparé du territoire national, s'y touve enfin réuni.[A protectorate] remains, in certain respects at least, outside, in the margin; so that a final exertion, a final act remains to be performed; in order that this territory which remains by a legal nicety nominally separated from the national territory may be finally united to it.Alfred de Lapradelle, French Oral Argument, Nationality Decrees Case

Does the International Court of Justice have the power to indicate legally binding provisional measures? On the basis of the provisions of the UN Charter and the Statute of the International Court of Justice, it seems unlikely that the Court is bestowed with such a power. An alternative argument, which regards interim protection as a general principle of law, thus giving it binding force, is also not without difficulties. The situation seems to be clearer, however, when states declare in a treaty their intention to be bound by the provisional measures indicated by the Court. The argument considering provisional measures as a ‘moral obligation’ will be examined as well.

Arbitration — The law to be applied — Systems of law prescribed in Arbitration Agreement — Exclusion of law of country of seat of tribunal — Residuary application of international law — Application of law of State Party subject to rules of private international law — Concession Agreement as fundamental law of Parties — Rejection by Tribunal of specific foreign legal systems.

Arbitration — The arbitration treaty — Failure of parties to agree on question to be submitted to arbitration — Provision for each party to submit own question to Tribunal.

Arbitration — Death of arbitrator — Procedure on.

Arbitration — Procedure — Competence to determine jurisdiction — Limitation of — Absence of power to act as friendly mediator Limitation of competence to decide questions indicated by parties — Absence of power to suggest measures of reconciliation between conflicting contractual agreements — Extension of competence by agreement between parties — Competence to pass judgment on exercise of sovereign rights.

Arbitration — Procedure — Rules of — Translation of proceedings.

Arbitration — The award — Declaratory nature of — Agreement as to.

Arbitration — The award — Declaratory award — Nature of.

Arbitration — The award — Revision by courts of country where arbitration held.

Arbitration — Arbitral tribunals — Exemption from interference by Government of country where sitting, when a State is a Party.

International Court of Justice — Advisory jurisdiction — Competence to examine question in abstract form.

Permanent Court of International Justice — Contentious jurisdiction — Declaratory Judgments.

State responsibility — For interference with concessionary contracts — Respect for acquired rights — Subsequent contract with another concessionaire containing conflicting provision — “ Right of priority ” for transport of oil as to which first concession gave exclusive right — Supremacy of provisions of first concession — Right of transport as acquired right — Whether capable of being affected by agreement between Government and third party — Whether concessionary contract exempts grantee from regulatory powers of granting Government — Nature of concessions — Oil concession — Right of supervision or intervention of grantor State — Concession agreement and acquired rights — Right of ownership of oil extracted by concessionaire — Absence of express provision — International effects of concession — Principles of interpretation of concession agreement — “ Plain, ordinary and usual sense ” of terms — Reference to dictionary definitions — Principles of restrictive interpretation — Relevance of a State being party to contract — Contra proferentem rule — Distinction between public service concessions and concessions for exploitation of raw materials — Ascertainment of intention of parties by reference to their conduct — Whether concession contract can constitute State legislative enactment.

State Responsibility — For Interference with Concessionary Contracts — Expenditure on Contract Rendered Abortive by Insistence on Unacceptable Conditions — Sharing of Responsibility.

State Responsibility — For Interference with Concessionary Contracts — Derogation from Lighthouses Concession — Grant of Exemption from Dues to Steamship Company.

Treaties — Interpretation of — Principles and Rules of — Interpretation by Reference to “Bad Drafting” — Article 59 of Statute of Permanent Court of International Justice

Treaties — Interpretation of — Consideration of Preparatory Work — Article 59 of Statute of Permanent Court of International Justice

Treaties — Interpretation of — Miscellaneous — Binding Force of Previous Judgment in Lis Concerning Interpretation of Treaty

Arbitration — Law Applied by Arbitral Tribunals — Previous Decisions of Permanent Court of International Justice Regarded as Res judicata — Article 59 of Statute of the Court — Article 84 of Hague Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, 1907 — Relevance of Distinct Nature of Lis — Relevance of Differing Basis of Previous Judgment — Relevance of Terms of Compromis Leading to Previous Judgment.

Permanent Court of International Justice — Decisions of, Regarded as Res Judicata — Article 59 of Statute of the Court — Relevance of Distinct Nature of Lis — Relevance of Differing Basis of Previous Judgment — Relevance of Terms of Compromis Leading to Previous Judgment.

State Succession — Succession with Regard to Contractual Obligations and Concessions — Responsibility for Expenditure on Contract Rendered Abortive by Act of Predecessor — Contributory Negligence of Claimant — Relevance of Question Whether Debt Admitted, Liquidated or Easily Ascertainable — Responsibility for Breach by Predecessor of Concession Contract — Relevance of Privity of Successor State — Merger of Crete and Greece — Critical Date — General Question of Transmission of Responsibility on Territorial Change — Arbitration — Previous Decisions of Permanent Court of International Justice Regarded as Res judicata — Article 59 of Statute of the Court — Article 84 of Hague Convention for Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, 1907 — Relevance of Distinct Nature of Lis — Relevance of Differing Basis of Previous Judgment — Relevance of Terms of Compromis Leading to Previous Judgment

Permanent Court of International Justice — Judgments — Contents of — In Relation to Alternative Submissions Put Forward by the Parties — Interpretation of Arbitration Agreement.

Permanent Court of International Justice — Statute — Article 41 — Interim Measures of Protection.

Permanent Court of International Justice — Statute of — Judges ad hoc — Advisory Jurisdiction — Right to appoint National Judges as Distinguished from the Right to appoint Agents — Article 31 of the Statute and 71 of the Rules.

Permanent Court of International Justice — Procedure — Joinder of Actions.

Permanent Court of International Justice — Statute of — National Judges — Parties Having the Same Interest — Article 31 of the Statute and Article 71, Paragraph 2, of the Rules of the Court.

Permanent Court of International Justice — Judgments — Contents of — In Relation to Alternative Submissions Put Forward by the Parties — Interpretation of Arbitration Agreement.

Permanent Court of International Justice — Advisory Opinions — Request by Parties as Distinguished from Request by the Council.