YEAR LEADING CASES IMPORTANT POINTS

1876 R.Vs. Keyn Definition of I.L.(Civilized States &

collection of usages)
Regina v. Keyn, also known as the case of the  IL is based on justice, equity
Franconia. At a technical level the case and conscience.
involved a question of criminal jurisdiction, the
right of an English court to try a foreigner for
an offence committed on the high seas. This
issue arose out of a collision between the
British steamship Strathclyde, and the German

om
steamship Franconia.
1900 Pacquete Habana Case (USA Justice Gray
Supreme Court) -International Law is part of our law,
and must be ascertained and

i.c
The owners of the vessels were not aware of administered by the Courts of Justice of
the existence of a war until they were stopped appropriate jurisdiction.
by U.S. (P) squadron. No incriminating -State laws and practices, treaties,
material like arms was found on the fishermen writings of publicists evidencing usage,

ht
and they did not make any attempt to run the
blockade after learning of its existence not did
they resist their arrest. When the owners (D)
and decisions of court, etc are materials
uniformly prove the existence of a
valid customary rule.
is
appealed, they argued that both customary
international law and writings of leading
dr
international scholars recognized an
exemption from seizure at wartime of coastal
fishing vessels.
w

1905 West Rand Central Gold Mining Co. Vs. R. Definition of I.L (form of rules..
determining their conduct)
.la

A petition of right alleged that, before the  Custom is of such nature that it
outbreak of war between the late South African has received general consent of
Republic and Great Britain, gold, the produce the nations and no civilized
of a mine in the Republic owned by the
w

country shall oppose it.

suppliants, had been taken from the suppliants
by officials acting on behalf of the Government
w

of the Republic; that the Government by the

laws of the Republic was liable to return the
gold or its value to the suppliants.
w

There is no principle of international law by

which, after annexation of conquered territory,
the conquering State becomes liable, in the
absence of express stipulation to the contrary,
to discharge financial liabilities of the
conquered State incurred before the outbreak
of war.
1920 Stoeck v Public Trustee Nationality of a person and the
Concept of statelessness.
 Statelessness was defined in the holding
of this case- “If a person is not a citizen
of any state, he will be called stateless
and this conditions is to be called
'statelessness'”.
1921 Luthar vs. Sagor There is no distinction between de
facto and de jure recognition for the
purpose of giving effect to the internal
Luther was a British Citizen who used to run a
acts of the recognized States.
Timber industry in Soviet Russia. On 1917 the

om
Russian Government nationalized his factory
and thereafter Mr Luther left Russia and went
to the UK. In 1920 Mr. Sagor came to an
agreement with Russian Nationalized business

i.c
company to buy some timber, the company
sent timbers accordingly but when timers
reached in UK Mr. Luther claimed that those

UK never recognized the government of ht

timbers were his timbers, he pointed that as

Russia, as well as Russia, wrongfully took over

is
his factory, therefore, the civilized court of UK
cannot validate the rule of Russian law.
dr

1923 S. S. Wimbledon Case Treaty is superior to custom when

there is an apparent conflict between the
An English steamship, the “Wimbledon”, with two.
w

a cargo of munitions and artillery stores

consigned to the Polish Naval Base at Danzig. Treaty and custom do not oppose each
.la

When the vessel arrived in the course of its other but interact and supplement each
voyage at the entrance to the Kiel Canal, it was other.
refused permission to pass through by the
w

Director of Canal Traffic, who based his action

on the German neutrality orders issued in
w

connection with the Russo-Polish war and on

instructions received by him.
w

Germany thus had a definite duty of allowing

the passage of the Wimbledon through the Kiel
Canal, and its neutrality did not oblige the
prohibition of allowing the passage.
1925 Mavrommatis Palestine  Doctrine of Subrogation
Concession Case (Greece and UK) (stepping into the shoes of the
other)
M, a Greek subject received certain  Treaty becomes effective only
concessions from the Ottoman authorities in
after ratification.
 regard to certain public work in Palestine, and
thereby the British government as a
Mandatory Power for Palestine had refused to
recognize his rights to their full extent. The
Greek government sought judgement to the
effect that the British government, in its
capacity as a Mandatory Power was bound to
maintain concessions, or to redeem them by
paying reasonable compensation. The court
held that the concessions concerning
Jerusalem were valid (by application of the

om
principle of subrogation), but since M had
suffered no loss, the claim for indemnity
should be dismissed.
1925 Island of Palmas Case Prescription
(Reported (Netherlands v. United States)

i.c
in 1928)
Both America and Netherlands claimed
sovereignty over the Island of Palmas. The
arbitrator, Huber, decided in favour of the
ht
Netherlands on the basis of unchallenged acts
of peaceful display of sovereignty by
is
Netherlands spread over the period
1927 France v. Turkey (S S Lotus Case)
dr

“The words ‘principles of international

There was a collision between a French and a law’ ordinarily used can only mean
Turkish ship, resulting in death of eight
international law as it is applied between
w

Turkmen. When the French ship Lotus arrived

in Turkish waters, criminal proceedings were nations belonging to the community of
instituted in the Turkish courts against the States”.
.la

French officer of the watch on duty on the

Lotus at the time of collision. The matter is  Territoriality of Criminal Law
referred to the ICJ The French government  Opinio juris is essential to the
w

contended that there was a customary rule of creation of a new customary rule
international law granting exclusive criminal of international law.
jurisdiction to the State the flag of which a
 IL governs relation between
w

vessel is flying. After examination of the

independent nations. The rules of
material before it (treaties, State laws, judicial
law binding upon countries
decisions. etc.), the court held that no such
w

therefore emanate from their own

customary rule was established because opinio
free will as expressed in
juris could not be proved.
conventions or by usages
generally accepted as expressing
principles of law and established
in order to regulate the relations
between these co-existing
independent communities.
 Courts consider that the words
principles of IL can only mean IL
 as it is applied between nations
belonging to the community of
countries.

The Lotus case has been overruled by

the Geneva Convention on Law of Sea,
1958, Art. 11 of which states that no
penal or disciplinary proceeding may be
instituted against the persons
responsible for the collision -except
before the judicial/administrative

om
authorities either of the flag State or of
the State of which they are nationals.
1928 Chorzow Factory (Indemnity Res Judicata (Germany and
Jurisdiction) Case aka Polish Upper Poland)
Silesia Case 

i.c
 Make Reparation (compensation)
After the first world war, a bipartite who violates a rule.
agreement was entered wherein the A signatory States’ misuse of its
control of Upper Silesia area was
transferred by Germany to Poland on ht rights in the interval before
ratification may amount to a
is
the condition that Poland would not breach of treaty (It implies that
forfeit any property of Germany. with the signature of a treaty, a
dr
However, Poland in breach of the certain limited status is
agreement sold two German factories conferred upon the signatory
located in that area. State with respect to treaty).
w

1928 Danzing Railway Official Case No jurisdiction of PCIJ over rights

of individuals.
.la

Poland had acquired, under an international

agreement, Danzing Railway Co. Under the
said agreement, Poland had agreed to provide
w

certain facilities to the railway officials.

Subsequently, Poland refused to provide those
w

facilities. Poland argued that since the

agreement was in the form of an international
treaty it created rights and duties only in
w

respect of parties to the treaty, and hence the

individuals as such cannot possess any rights
under the said treaty.
1932 Free Zones case Art. 435 of Versailles Peace Treaty
Switzerland, a third party, enjoyed since 1815 was not binding upon Switzerland
the benefit of a free customs zone in French who was not a party to that treaty,
territory in accordance with a stipulation made except to the extent to which that
in her favour by certain multipartite treaties to
which France was a party. Switzerland, though
country accepted it
 not a party, accepted those benefits. It was held
that she could not be deprived of that right
without her consent.
1933 Eastern Greenland Case  Prescription (Denmark)
(Norway and Denmark)

Norway and Denmark claim their title over a

part of the Greenland on the basis of displayed
sovereignty. Denmark contended that it
exercised sovereignty over Greenland

om
peacefully and continuously for a long period.
Norway maintained that at the time of its
occupation it was a no man’s land area.
1937 Bank of Ethiopia vs. National Principles laid down in Luthar vs.
Bank of Egypt Sagor were followed.

i.c
British Government granted recognition to the To be a de facto government that
Italian Government as being the de facto government must have effective
government of the area of Abyssinia.
ht
It was held that authority of de jure ruler
control over the territory.
is
(exiled emperor of Abyssinia) was merely
theoretical (incapable of being enforced), and
effect must be given to the acts of de facto
dr

ruler.
1937 Diversion of Water from Meuse  Res Judicata
 Doctrine of Estoppel
w

An 1863 treaty between Belgium and

the Netherlands regulated water use of
.la

the Meuse River to ensure sufficient

flow for navigation and irrigation. As
the economic use of the river valley
w

developed, increased pressure was

placed on the river. In 1937, the
w

Netherlands brought proceedings,

alleging that Belgium’s use of the river
w

had expanded beyond the terms of the

treaty. Belgium filed counterclaims
against expansion projects by the
Netherlands
1939 Arantzazu Mendi Case Nationalist Government of Spain which
was recognized as a de facto government
There was a civil war going on in the of the part of Spain under its
control, was entitled to jurisdiction
State of Spain. A major part of it was immunity in an action brought against it
under the effective control of the rebel by the de jure Government of Spain.
 leader. General Franco, whose
Government was recognised de facto by
the Government of Britain. A ship
named Arantzanu Mendi was registered
in the port under the effective control of
General Franco. While it was on the
high seas, the Government of General
Franco and the de jure government of
Spain issued decrees requisitioning the
ship.

om
Treaty did not prevent either State from
developing the river resources as they
had been doing.

i.c
1942 Ex parte Quirin (U.S. Supreme Court, The very essence of the U.N.
1942) Charter is that individuals have
international duties which

ht transcend the national obligations

of obedience imposed by the
individual States. He who violates
is
the law of war cannot obtain an
immunity while acting in
dr
pursuance of the authority of the
State if the State in authorising
action moves outside its
w

competence in international law”

1949 Reparation for Injuries Suffered United Nations Organization is a
.la

In the Service of the United Nations international person

Case.

A French observer appointed by U.N., was

w

murdered while doing his duty. The U.N.

requested ICJ to give an advisory opinion as to
w

whether in such matters the U.N. can claim

compensation and damages for Organization
w

and the persons appointed under its service.

1949 Corfu Channel Case, State responsibility- modes of

(First Dispute between Albania and reparation-use of circumstantial
case Britain evidence-right of innocent
o passage- passage of warships
f ICJ) Albanian civil liability for the mining through territorial waters.
of the Corfu Channel and subsequent
damage to two British naval vessels
 that resulted from striking mines.
1950 Asylum Case Columbia  Regional/Local Custom-
v. Peru The party which relies on a
custom, must prove custom
Columbia gave asylum to a rebel Peruvian is established in such a
political leader in its embassy in Peru. The
Colombian Ambassador requested the Peru
manner that it has become
Government to allow rebel leader to leave the binding on the other
country on the ground that the Colombian party.
government qualified him as a political refugee.  Difference in territorial
But the Peru government refused. The case was asylum and extra

om
referred to the International Court of Justice.
The Colombian government based his claim on territorial asylum.
certain international agreements, and an
international custom regarding diplomatic
asylum.

i.c
1952 Anglo Iranian Oil Case UK v Pacta tertis nec nocent nec
Iran

Anglo-Iranian Company was a company

ht prosunt

Treaties binds the parties and only

is
registered in Britain, a contract was entered the parties (ARTICLE 34 OF
into between this company and Iran wherein
VCLT,
dr
Iran gave some concessions to the company in
respect of extracting oil in Iran. Later, Iran 1969)
nationalised this company by passing a law to
w

that effect. Britain contended that said When a treaty imposes some
contract was sponsored by her and Iran had obligation on a third State party
promised not to end or otherwise make any and it accepts that obligation in
.la

change in the concessions granted. The ICJ writing, then such a third party
rejected the contention of Britain on the becomes bound by that treaty (Art.
ground that there was no privity of contract 35, Vienna Convention)
w

between Iran and Britain.

w

The rule that an obligation arises

for a third State from a provision in
a treaty only with its consent
w

would not apply to the case of an

aggressor State (Art. 75, Vienna
Convention). Another exception is
contained in Art. 2, para 6, of the
UN Charter which states that UN
Charter in so far as it is necessary
for maintenance of international
peace and security.
1952 Civil Air Transport vs Central Air When State is granted de facto
Transport Corporation recognition initially and de jure
recognition later on, the effect of
At the date when the transaction regarding the recognition starts from the date of
sale of the property of respondent corporation
de facto recognition.
took place, the nationalist China was de jure
government of China and hence it was entitled
to sell its property. Retroactive effect of de jure
recognition of a Government did
not mean that legal acts performed
by other or previous de jure

om
government
would become invalid.
1953 Nottebohm Case (Liechtenstein v  Principle of
Guatemala) Effective Nationality.

i.c
Liechtenstein sought a ruling to
force Guatemala to recognize Friedrich
Nottebohm(Born in Germany) as a
Liechtenstein national. ht  Principle of Res judicata
is
1954 Effect of awards of
compensation made by the
united nations administrative
dr

tribunal advisory opinion of ICJ

1960 Portugal v. India  Right of passage over
w

(Right of passage Case) Indian territory.

 Treaty provision practiced
This case deals with the question relating to the
.la

right of Portugal to send its nationals and

for
military through the Indian territory. Until a long time may become a
1954, Portugal possessed the right of passage custom.
w

through Indian territory; the right was,

however, subject to control and regulation by
India. The right of passage was only in respect
w

of private persons, civil officials and goods in

general, to the extent necessary for the exercise
w

of its (Portugese) sovereignty- over the

Portugese enclaves. In 1953-54, because of
tension created by the overthrow of Portugese
rule in the enclaves, the Indian Government
suspended the right of passage of Portugal over
the affected area, in view' of repercussions over
the border areas of Indian territory'. Portugal
contended, before the ICJ, that Indian action
was in furtherance of Indian efforts to annex
the Portugese territories in India and had made
it impossible for Portugal to exercise her rights
 of sovereignty in the affected areas.
1961 Lawless Case Derogation from convention
allowed
Mr. Lawless, an Irishman, was detained in if situation demands.
prison by the Irish Government without any
trial; no reasons were given for his detention. A
writ of habeas was not allowed to him so that he
could not approach the Supreme Court of
Ireland. Thereafter, Lawless applied to the
Commission of Human Rights which, in turn,
referred the entire matter to the European Court

om
of Human Rights. The Court admitted the
petition and observed that it did have
jurisdiction over such cases where basic human
rights were denied by a State to its own
nationals or aliens. However, the Court upheld

i.c
the action of the Irish Government on the
ground that the Government had acted under its
statutory powers as conferred by the legislature.
Lawless was detained under emergency power
of the Government.
ht
is
1962 De Becker The observations of the Human
Rights Commission infact forced
the Belgian Government to change
dr

the legislation with regard to the

detention of individuals.
w

1962 Certain Expenses of the United General Assembly passed Uniting

Nations for Peace resolution on 03 Nov.
.la

1950.
In this case, ICJ approved the validity of
Uniting for Peace resolution.
1962 Temple of Preah Vihar  Doctrine of Estoppel
w

(Thailand and Cambodia)

In this case, in 1904 the boundary between

w

Cambodia (then a protectorate of France) and

Thailand (then Siam) in the sparsely populated
w

area of the Preah Vihear was determined by a

treaty between France and Siam. The treaty
stated that it was to follow the watershed line.
The area where the temple was situated was
awarded to Thailand under the 1904 boundary
treaty. The details for the demarcation were to
be worked out by a joint Franco-Siamese
Commission.
 Later, surveys were conducted by technical
experts on the basis of which a map was
prepared by the French authorities in 1908
which placed the temple in Cambodia.

The Court awarded the territory to Cambodia

by applying the rule of estoppel, because by
her conduct Thailand had acquiesced to the
frontier line contended by Cambodia, as shown
in the map.

om
1969 North Sea Continental Shelf Whether Article 6(equidistance
Cases, ICJ Rep.1969 principle) of the Geneva
(Demark, Netherland and Convention on Continental Shelf a
Germany) customary rule?

i.c
Denmark and Netherland-  “For a state practice to
Equidistance principle constitute opinio juris (belief that

Germany-
Just and Equitable share.
ht action was carried out as a legal
obligation) not only must the acts
concerned amount to a settled
is
practice, but they must also be
A dispute arose between the States of such, or be carried in such a way,
dr
Germany, Denmark and Netherlands as to be the evidence of a belief
regarding the delimitation of their continental
shelf. Both Denmark and Netherlands relied on
that this practice is rendered
obligatory by the existence of a
w

a multilateral treaty which provided for

delimitation by equidistance method, in the rule of law requiring it.”
absence of agreement. The treaty permitted the  The ICJ expressed the view that
.la

signatory States to reserve their position with provisions in treaties can

respect to the equidistance method. Germany
generate customary law and may
had signed the treaty but had not ratified it,
be of norm- creating character.
w

moreover, it had reserved its position with

respect to delimitation which might adversely 
affect its own continental shelf. Both Denmark  Equidistance principle is not of
w

and Netherlands contended that the norm creating character.

equidistance -special circumstance rule is not
only a conventional provision but has emerged

w

into a custom, and hence binding on Germany.  Whatever the reasoning of a court
Germany, while denying the obligatory of justice, its decision must by
character of the provision, contended that the definition be just and therefore in
correct rule to be applied in such cases is one that sense equitable.
according to which each of the States
concerned should have a “just
and equitable share” of the available  The passage of only a short time
continental shelf, in proportion to the length of period is not necessarily a bar to
its coastline or sea frontage the formation of a new customary
IL.
 
 Opinio juris must be present before
a practice/ usage is to become a
customary rule.
 Customary norm created by
means of a treaty was rendered
1970 Barcelona Traction Case  Doctrine of Estoppel

The Barcelona Traction Co. was  Principle of self-determination is a

incorporated in Canada, and it was

om
norm of jus cogens.
operating in Spain. However, a
considerable investment in the company “...whenever legal issues arise
was made by shareholders in Belgium. concerning the rights of States... as
Certain action taken by the Government to which rights international law has

i.c
of Spain seriously injured the company. not established its own rules, it has
In the eyes of law, the company was of
to refer to the relevant rules of
Canadian nationality, though a majority
municipal law”.
of the shareholders affected were
Belgian nationals. The Belgian
Government espoused the cause of its
ht
is
citizens as shareholders of the company
1971 Namibia case  The imperative character of the
dr

right of people to self-determination

Under a claim of right to annex Namibia, and the imperative character of
South Africa occupied its territory in violation human rights was emphasised.
w

of a United Nations (U.N.) Security Council

Mandate which though later terminated due to
.la

South Africa's breach, empowered the Security

Council to enforce its terms.
1973 Fisheries Jurisdiction (UK  Doctrine of Rebus Sic Stantibus
w

v Iceland) (frustration)
w

The International Court of Justice Art. 62 of the Vienna Convention

considered a dispute between Iceland embodies the rebus doctrine
w

and the United Kingdom regarding a (though the words rebus sic
proposed extension by Iceland of stantibus are not used). Art. 62(1)
its fisheries jurisdiction. allows the invocation of the
doctrine, but subject to the
The Court held that the 1972 Icelandic following conditions
Regulations constituted a unilateral (i) the change must be of
extension of the exclusive fishing rights circumstances which existed at the
of Iceland to 50 nautical miles. Iceland time the treaty was concluded,
could not unilaterally exclude the (ii) the change must be
 United Kingdom from areas between fundamental one,
the fishery limits agreed to in the 1961 (iii) the change must also be one
Exchange of Notes. not foreseen by the parties at the
time of conclusion of the treaty,
(iv) the existence of those
circumstances must have
constituted an essential basis of the
consent of the parties to be bound
by the treaty, and
(v) the effect of the change must be

om
radically to transform the scope of
obligations still to be performed
under the treaty.

i.c
The court observed that a treaty
concluded under the threat or use
of force is void.
1973 Nuclear
France)
Test (Australia v
ht State responsibility in respect
of
is
conduct of nuclear test.
Australia and New Zealand each instituted
dr
proceedings against France concerning tests of
nuclear weapons which France proposed to
carry out in the atmosphere in the South Pacific
w

region. France stated that it considered the

Court manifestly to lack jurisdiction and
.la

refrained from appearing at the public hearings

or filing any pleadings.
1985 Frontier Dispute Case The Court of Justice held that it
(Burkina Faso vs. Republic of Mali) can take the help of that equity
w

which both the parties have

The dispute concerned the border accepted or given consent to.
w

between Burkina Faso and Niger, both

of which occupy territory previously
w

held by the French colonies of Upper

Volta and Niger, respectively.
Discussion regarding the border began
shortly after the nations gained their
independence

1986 Nicaragua v USA -Sources of IL are not

hierarchical but are necessarily
Nicaragua (P) brought a suit against the complementary and inter related.
 United States (D) on the ground that the -Doctrine of Self Defence.
United States (D) was responsible for -Universality of practice is not
illegal military and paramilitary necessary, the practice should
activities in and against Nicaragua. The have been generally observed or
jurisdiction of the International Court of repeated by numerous States
Justice to entertain the case as well as (Custom)
the admissibility of Nicaragua’s (P)
application to the I.C.J. was challenged A customary practice, even when
by the United States (D) it is general and consistent, is not
customary law unless, opinio

om
juris is present, i.e. unless the
practice is recognized as being
required by international law. It is
this sense of legal obligation, as

i.c
distinguished from motives of
fairness, convenience, or morality,
that underlies customary law.

ht Even if the customary norm and

is
treaty norm were to have exactly
the same content, this would not
be a reason for the court to hold
dr

that the incorporation of the

customary norm into treaty law
w

must deprive the customary norm

of its applicability as distinct from
.la

that of treaty norm.

Customary rules of international

law cannot be regarded as to have
w

ceased to exist if they have been

transformed into treaty rules
w

2010 Accordance with International Law Advisory Opinion of ICJ , Kosovo

of the Unilateral Case, (Resolutions of Security
w

Declaration of Independence in Respect Council as a source of

of Kosovo Case, 2010 international law)

Accordance with International Law of

the Unilateral Declaration of
Independence in Respect of Kosovo was
a request for an advisory opinion
referred to the International Court of
Justice by the United Nations General
 Assembly regarding the 2008 Kosovo
declaration of independence. The
territory of Kosovo is the subject of a
dispute between Serbia and the Republic
of Kosovo established by the
declaration. This was the first case
regarding a unilateral declaration of
independence to be brought before the
court.

om
Important Case-Laws (Extradition)

 Dr. Babu Ram Saksena v. The State, AIR 1950 SC 155

 The State of Madras v. C.G. Menon, AIR 1954 SC 517

i.c
 Hans Muller of Nurenburg v. Superintendent, Presidency Jail, Calcutta and Ors., AIR
1955 SC 367
 In Re: K.R.P.L. Chockalingam Chettiar, AIR 1960 Mad 548

ht
Rajender Kumar Jain & Ors v. State through Special Police Establishment & Ors,
1980 (3) SCC 435
is
 Kubic Darusz v. Union of India, 1990 (1) SCC 568
 Sarabjit Rick Singh v. Union of India, 2008 (2) SCC 417
dr
 Bhavesh Jayanti Lakhani v. State of Maharashtra, (2009) 9 SCC 551
 Mohammed Zubair Fauzal Awam v. State (Represented by the Inspector of Police &
Another), 2011 Cri LJ 2975
w

 P. Pushpavathy v. Ministry of External Affairs, 2013

.la
w
w
w