Document:- A/CN.4/157 Digest of Decisions of National Courts relating to Succession of States and Governments Study prepared by the Secretariat Topic: Succession of States and Governments Extract from the Yearbook of the International Law Commission:- 1963 , vol. II Downloaded from the web site of the International Law Commission (http://www.un.org/law/ilc/index.htm) Copyright © United Nations SUCCESSION OF STATES AND GOVERNMENTS [Agenda item 4] DOCUMENT A/CN.4/157 DIGEST OF DECISIONS OF NATIONAL COURTS RELATING TO SUCCESSION OF STATES AND GOVERNMENTS: Study prepared by the Secretariat [Original: English] [18 April 1963] CONTENTS Paragraphs INTRODUCTION (i)-(iv) Part A. Succession of States I. GENERAL PROBLEMS OF STATE SUCCESSION 1-91 A. Date of transfer of sovereignty 1-21 B. Transitional problems and arrangements 22-91 Paragraphs (i) Problems of transition relating to nationality 22-26 (ii) Problems of transition relating to criminal law and procedure 27-44 (iii) Problems of transition in non-criminal matters 45-68 (iv) Problems of transition relating to execution 69-91 II. STATE SUCCESSION IN RELATION TO TREATIES 92-164 A. Succession of new States 92-130 B. The principle of movable treaty frontiers 131-142 C. Identity and continuity of States 143-164 III. STATE SUCCESSION IN RELATION TO THE LEGAL SYSTEM 165-195 A. Cases favouring the continued application of the law of the predecessor State 166-184 B. Cases favouring the replacement of the law of the predecessor State .. 185-195 IV. STATE SUCCESSION IN RELATION TO PRIVATE RIGHTS AND CONCESSIONS 196-279 A. Decisions based on the British constitutional system 197-238 B. Decisions of American courts 239-259 C. Decisions of courts of civil law countries 260-279 V. STATE SUCCESSION IN RELATION TO THE STATUS OF PUBLIC SERVANTS 280-325 VI. STATE SUCCESSION IN RELATION TO PUBLIC PROPERTY AND DEBTS 326-443 A. Public property 326-374 B. Public debts 375-425 C. Delicts and breach of contract in particular 426-443 Part B. Succession of Governments VII. SUCCESSION OF GOVERNMENTS 444-501 96 Yearbook of the International Law Commission, Vol. II Introduction subjects arising out of injuries done to them by the Allies. At the date of the signature of the Treaty of (i) The present document, prepared by the Secretariat, Trianon (4 June 1920), Fiume, the home port of the contains a digest of decisions of national courts relating sunk steamer, was under the control of Gabriele d'An- to succession of States and Governments. As indicated nunzio. From 1921 to 1924 it became a " Free State ", in paragraph 73 of the report of the International Law but in 1924 it was annexed to Italy by the Treaty of Commission covering the work of its fourteenth session,1 Rapallo,2 and by the terms of the Treaty the claimant the Secretary-General, by notes verbales of 21 June and Company acquired Italian nationality. The Company 27 July 1962, has invited Member Governments to had been domiciled in Fiume since April 1920. transmit to him, among other things, the texts of all pertinent domestic judicial decisions by 15 July 1963, 2. The Court did not think it necessary to decide what a time limit which has not yet expired. At the time of was the status of Fiume at the date of the Treaty. In the preparation of the present documents, no informa- its view, the Treaty bound the people of Fiume irrespec- tion on decisions of municipal courts had been received tive of any future changes in the status of the city. by the Secretariat. On receipt of the material thus Whether the plaintiffs were or were not Hungarian requested and taking into account also other additional nationals at the effective date of the Treaty, the Court information which might be brought to its attention, had come to the conclusion that the clause in question the Secretariat will issue an addendum to the present plainly was intended to cover them. It appeared rea- document. sonably clear that the intention of the parties was that for acts or omissions done to the property of Hungarian (ii) In compiling this digest an effort has been made belligerents there should be no redress, whether the to cover all the available relevant material since the end of the First World War. More extensive treatment persons who had suffered damage did or did not continue has been given to decisions of the post-World War II to be Hungarian nationals up to the date of the Treaty. period and, in particular, to the available case law of 3. Whether for acts done before the acquisition of a the Courts of the countries which have acceded to new nationality the new State can or will exercise independence after 1945. Decisions relating to former protection or whether the former State can exercise colonies, including the former German colonies, have protection, may be debatable the Court said; but in also been dealt with because they might be of parti- the circumstances attending a peace treaty it appears cular topical interest. very natural that the former State should be required (iii) The material has been arranged according to to renounce protection for its ex-nationals, and in the subject-matter as indicated in the headings of the various Treaty of Trianon it seems clear that Hungary did so sections of the study. Within each section an attempt act. If the Treaty operated by international law only, has been made to present the cases in a logical order, the tribunal in Prize might well have had to determine taking into account the substance of the problems how far Hungary's attempt to affect the rights of ex- discussed or decided and the trends discernible in nationals could be treated as effective. But for an various groups of decisions. Arrangements based on the English court, whether in Prize or not, this question was " principal legal systems of the world ", on considera- precluded by the terms of the Treaty of Peace Act. tions of geography or on chronology have been adopted only where more relevant criteria did not appear to be Change of Sovereignty (Taxation) Case (1921) available. German Reichsfinanzhof (Reich Tribunal in Revenue ; Matters) (iv) The present digest is based on information given Juristische Wochenschrift, 1921, p. 1619 in the various legal publications available, particularly Annual Digest, 1919-1922, Case 57 in the " International Law Reports " and its predecessor, the " Annual Digest of International Law Cases ". 4. The German Capital Levy Act of 1919 applied to persons who, on 30 June 1919, were of German nationa- lity. The appellant had resided from 1906 in the pro- Part A: Succession of States vince of Posen and moved to Germany after Polish troops occupied the province after the Armistice of CHAPTER I. GENERAL PROBLEMS OF STATE SUCCESSION 11 November 1918. In 1920 he was asked to make a declaration for the assessment of the Capital Levy Act. (A) Date of transfer of sovereignty He contended that he was a Polish national and not, therefore, subject to the levy. The Bathori (1933) England, Judicial Committee of the Privy Council 5. The Reichsfinanzhof held that the appellant was 47 Lloyd's List Law Reports, 123 subject to the tax. Although he lost his German nationa- Annual Digest, 1931-1932, Case 51 lity by virtue of the Peace Treaty of Versailles, the change of nationality did not take place before 1. A claim for compensation for the illegal sinking of 10 January 1920, on which day the Treaty entered into a Hungarian merchantman by the British Navy during force. The mere signature of the Treaty did not impose World War I depended on the answer to the question on Germany the international obligation to treat the whether the claim was barred by Article 232 of the inhabitants of the ceded territories as aliens. Peace Treaty of Trianon, by which Hungary had renounced all claims which might be made by Hungarian 2 Before and during World War I Fiume was under Hunga- rian sovereignty. After World War II Fiume, now Rijeka, was 1 Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventeenth ceded by Italy to Yugoslavia (Peace Treaty with Italy of 10 Session, Supplement No. 9 (A/5209). February 1947). Succession of States and Governments 97 Case of the application of Weimar Constitution to Territories were submitted to the sovereign possession Danzig (1931) and authority of the Polish State on the basis of the High Court of Danzig agreement concluded among the victorious Powers. Danziger Juristische Monatsschrift, Vol. 10 (1931), 11. The whole German population of the Territories p. 124 was subject to transfer in so far as it had not already left Annual Digest, 1931-1932, p. 86 of its own accord. The Court stated that in exercising 6. The Court held that the German Constitution of its rights the Polish State introduced in the Recovered 1919 had legal force in Danzig (now Gdansk), although Territories its own public administration and its own Danzig was at the time about to be separated from administration of justice without delay, and very rapidly Germany and created a Free City by virtue of the Peace re-settled the region leaving on the spot only the indige- Treaty of Versailles. It is not permissible to argue, the nous population of Polish origin. The German popula- Court said, that in view of the impending separation of tion, for all practical purposes, no longer played the role Danzig from the mother-country, the German Constitu- of a subject of law as it had lost any organizational tion had only a provisional effect in the territory of bonds whatsoever.