Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-fmk2r Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-18T22:24:45.687Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Settlement of Interhandel Case

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 May 2017

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Judicial and Similar Proceedings
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1964

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

[Reproduced from a photocopy of the order. The Stipulation of Settlement and a note on the history of the litigation appear following the order.]

References

** [”In accordance.” Ed.]

* [Reproduced from a reprint of the Stipulation of Settlement as of April 15, 1964, provided by John J. Wilson, counsel to Société Internationale (Interhandel) . All footnotes are explanatory only, and are not part of the stipulation.

[By decisions of February 16 and April 24, 1942, based on the Trading with the Enemy Act, 50 U.S.C. App. Sec. 1, et seq., the Government of the United States vested almost all of the shares of General Aniline and Film Corporation, incorporated in the United States. The United States claimed that the shares seized, owned by Société International Pour Participations Industrielles et Commerciales S.A. (Interhandel), were in reality controlled by the German enemy company I.G. Farben.

[In 1948 Interhandel filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against the U.S. Attorney General to recover the shares, claiming they were neutral property. The complaint of Interhandel was dismissed with prejudice by order of the District Court, which was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court on June 16, 1958, reversed the judgment dismissing the complaint and remanded the case to the District Court. Société Internationale, etc. v. Rogers. 357 U.S. 197 (1958); 53 A.J.I.L. 177 (1959).

[Proceedings were instituted on October 2, 1957, by Switzerland against the United States in the International Court of Justice. The International Court of Justice held that the Swiss application was not admissible. Interhandel Case, Judgment of March 21, 1959: I.C.J. Reports 1959, p. 6.

[The Trading with the Enemy Act was amended by Public Law 87–846 of October 22, 1962, 76 Stat. 1107, 1113, 50 U.S.C. App. Sec. 9, to authorize the sale of General Aniline, with the proceeds of such sale to be held in escrow until settlement of the litigation. Thereafter the Stipulation of Settlement reported here was reached. Basically the settlement provides for the United States Government and Interhandel to share equally the proceeds from the sale of the contested 89 percent of vested shares. The United States will receive the entire proceeds of the other 11 per cent. Interhandel will also pay the United States $23,900,000 in taxes and other expenses, and also funds to protect non-consenting intervenors. As of May 1, 1964, General Aniline had not been sold.]

* Aa amended by Supplementary Agreement (March 25, 1964).

* As amended by Supplementary Agreement (March 25, 1964).

* As amended by Supplementary Agreement (March 25, 1964).

* As amended by Supplementary Agreement (March 25, 1964).

* As amended by Supplementary Agreement (March 25, 1964).

* As amended by Supplementary Agreement (March 25, 1964).

* Parenthesis closed by amendment in Supplementary Agreement (March 25, 1964).

* Figure 5 changed to 6 by Supplementary Agreement (March 25, 1964).

* Figure 5(a) changed to 6(a) by Supplementary Agreement (March 25, 1964).

** This figure should be read as 6(a), as it was changed to read in the other instance above.

* As amended by Supplementary Agreement (March 25, 1964).

** This amendment has been abandoned by the parties as unnecessary.

*** Judge Pine’s order of April 15, 1964 dissolved the injunction referred to in paragraph 2, and made the requested determination referred to in paragraph 3.

* As amended by Supplementary Agreement (March 25, 1964).

* This letter was changed from C to B by Supplementary Agreement (March 25, 1964).

* The complaints of all the intervenors listed hereon have been dismissed with prejudice by ipulation of all the parties.

* The complaints of all the intervenors listed hereon are still pending.

** Fractions are raised to next-higher whole number.

* As amended by Supplementary Agreement (March 25, 1964).

** This Schedule is referred to in Section XIII, paragraph 5 hereof.