008- Interpretation of Peace Treaties with Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania
On November 4th, 1949, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) was asked to give an advisory opinion on the interpretation of the peace treaties concluded between Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania on the one hand and Allies on the other hand in 1947. In a first advisory opinion dated March 30th 1950, the Court stated that countries which had signed a treaty providing for arbitral procedure for the settlement of disputes concerning its interpretation or application were required to appoint their representatives to the arbitration commissions provided for in that treaty.
Despite this advisory opinion, the three States that had refused to appoint their representatives to the arbitration commissions did not change their attitude. They were given a period within which to submit to the obligation imposed by the Treaties, as interpreted by the Court. At the end of that period, the Court was asked whether the Secretary-General — who, under the Treaties, is empowered to appoint the third member of the arbitral commission in the event of disagreement between the parties on that appointment — could make that appointment, even though one of the parties had not appointed his representative on the commission. In a second advisory opinion delivered on July 18th, 1950, the Court replied that this could not be, as this would lead to the creation of a two-member commission, whereas the Treaty provided for a three-member commission acting by a majority.
This summary is provided for informational purposes only, does not involve the responsibility of Dome and should in no way be used as a substitute for a careful reading of the judgment and order of the case.