INTERNATIONAL LAW
W.B. Fisch Fall 2008
Assignment #13

Ch. 6) INDIVIDUALS AND INTERNATIONAL LAW

A) Individuals as Objects of International Law

THE NOTTEBOHM CASE, p. 340 (ICJ 1955). Standing of Liechtenstein to sue Guatemala over alleged violation of Nottebohm’s rights as an alien.

1. What is the general principle of international law which Leichtenstein invokes against Guatemala here?

2. who decides whether N can become a Liechtenstein national?

3. what did N hope to accomplish by acquiring Liechtenstein nationality?

4. Why was Liechtenstein denied standing in this case?

a. Because N. was really a Guatemalan national?

b. Because N. was really a German national?

c. Because N. was really not a Liechtenstein national?

5. Could Germany have asserted this claim against Guatemala?

6. Suppose N had been mistreated by U.S. authorities during his detention there. Could Guatemala have asserted a claim against the U.S. for violation of N.’s rights under IL?

7. Suppose N had gone to Greece on a business trip and had been falsely arrested and detained by Greek authorities. Could Liechtenstein have asserted a claim against Greece for violation of N’s rights under IL?

8. With hindsight, what do you think N should have been advised to do differently to strengthen his claim to Liechtenstein’s diplomatic protection?

BARCELONA TRACTION CASE, p. 350 (ICJ 1970). Standing of states to assert claims of a corporation against other states.

1. Why was Belgium denied standing?

A. Because the injured person was a Spanish corporation?

B. Because the injured person was a Canadian corporation?

C. Because Belgium lacked a continuous interest from time of injury to time of suit?

2. Suppose Barcelona Traction were wholly owned by Canadian citizens at the time that the allegedly wrongful bankruptcy proceedings were instituted in Spain. One year later the entire stock of BT was sold by the Canadian shareholders to a U.S. national. Can the U.S. assert a claim against Spain for violation of BT’s rights under IL? Can Canada? Can anyone?

3. Suppose Spain had gotten into a quarrel with Belgium over trade issues, and had nationalized BT specifically in retaliation for Belgium’s failure to accord Spain certain trade benefits. Would Belgium have had standing to assert BT’s claim for wrongful expropriation?