Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-jwnkl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T04:37:45.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Editorial Note

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2009

Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Telders Moot Court Competition
Information
Leiden Journal of International Law , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , December 1990 , pp. 259 - 269
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation of the Leiden Journal of International Law 1990

References

1. 1946/1947 U.N.Y.B. 831.

2. 1949 1.C.J. Rep. 22.

3. Island of Palmas Case (Netherlands v. U.S.), 1928 P.C.I.J. (Ser. A, No.10)

4. Trail Smelter Case (U.S. v. Canada), 3 U.N.R.I.A.A. 1965 (1941)

5. This principle has been widely recognized by writers. See, e.g., L.F.E. Goldie, A General View of International Environmental Law. A Survey of Capabilities, Trends and Limits, 68–69 (R.C.A.D.I., Collogium 1973); A. Kiss, La Lutte Contre La Pollution de ľ Air sur le Plan International, id., at 174; P. Dupuy,International Responsibility of States for Damage Caused by Transfrontier Pollution, in O.E.C.D., Legal Aspects of transfrontier Pollution 374–375 (1977); E. Klein, Umweltschutz im Völkerrechtlichen Nachbarrecht 241–245 (1976); A. Rest, Responsibility and Liability for Transboundary Air pollution Damage, in C. Flinterman, B. Kwiatkowska &; J.G. Lammers (eds.), Transboundary Air Pollution, International Legal Aspects of the Cooperation of States 308 (1986).

6. Nuclear Tests Case (Australia v. France; New Zealand v. France) 1974 I.CJ. Rep. 389.

7. Quoted by Schindler, A., The Administration of Justice in the Federal Court of Swilzerland, 15 AJIL 173(1921).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8. Tribunal Administratiff de Strassbourg, July 27, 1983, R.J.E. 343–344 (1983).

9. In a case concerning pollution of the Rhine originating from French territory and affecting the Netherlands, the District Court of Rotterdam made reference to the same principle and stated that:[T]he discharge of waste salts into an international river bu a national legal person amounts, in this case, to a breach by this person of a general principle of law binding on this person sic mere tuo ut alienum non laedas.Handelskwekerij G.J. Bier B.V. v. Mines de Potasse ďAlsace S.A., District Court of Rotterdam, January 8, 1979, 11 Netherlands Yearbook of International Law 333 (1980).

10. 11 I. L. M. 1420(1972).

11. Sohn, L.B., The Stockholm Declaration on the Human Environment, 14 Harv. Intť L.J. 492 (1973).Google Scholar

12. 1972 U.N.Y.B. 331.

13. Abstaining votes were cast by Eastern bloc countries. A likely explanation of the nonsubstantive grounds for abstention by these countries was given by the Cuban delegate to the Second Committee, who stated that: “His delegation had abstained from the vote because it had not participated to the Stockholm Conference; however the draft Resolution contained elements that it unreservedly approved”. Reported in Handl, G., Stale Liability for Accidental Transnational Environmental Damage by Private Persons, 74 AJIL 528 (1980). In fact afterwards they showed their acceptance of the sic Mere tuo principle by voting in favour of Art. 30 of the Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of States. Reported in 1974 U.N.Y.B.407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

14. 1972 U.N.Y.B. 330.

15. 1974 U.N.Y.B. 407.

16. 1982 U.N.Y.B. 1024.

17. 1974 Council Recommendation, 14 I.L.M. 242 (1975).

18. Resolution No. 4 (68), European Yearbook 381 (1968).

19. Para. 3(D), 1980 Y.B. I.L.C..

20. 13 I.L.M.591 (1974).

21. 21 I.L.M. 1311 (1982).

22. See also Art. 2 of the I.L.I. Resolution, in: 62 A.I.D.I.297 (1987); and Art. 3 of the International Law Association Montreal Rules, International Law Association, Montreal Rules of International Law Applicable to Transfrontier Pollution, Report of the Sixtieth Conference (1982).

23. B. Bothe, Developments and Problems of Co-oporation with regard to Transboundary Air Pollution in Western Europe, in C. Flinterman, B. Kwiatkowska & J.G. Lammers (eds.), supra note 5, at 21.

24. J.G. Lammers, Pollution of International Watercourses 250 (1980). Other similar examples of state practice in Europe are reported in: I.H. Van Lier, Acid Rain and International Law 116–117 (1983), and J.G. Lammers, id. at 224.

25. Rest, Responsibility and Liability for Transboundary Air Pollution Damage, in C. Flinterman, B.Kwiatkowska & J.G. Lammers, supra note 5, at 299.

26. The World Bond, a tanker registered in Liberia, had leaked 12,000 gallons of crude oil into the sea while unloading at the Atlantic Richfield refinery at Cherry Point, Washington. The oil spread to Canadian waters and fouled beaches in British Columbia; consequently the Canadian Government sent a note to the U.S. Departmentg requesting full damages to be paid by those responsible. Handl, supra note 13, at 545.

27. 11 Canadian Yearbook of International Law 334 (1973).

28. The same principle is also reaffirmed in Para. 601 of the Restatement of the Foreign Relations Law of the US. (Revised), 1986.

29. Brownlie, I., System of the Law of Nations: State Responsibility 50 (1983); J. Willisch, State Responsibility for technological Damage in International Law 273 (1987).Google Scholar

30. A.L. Springer, The International Law of Pollution 132 (1983); A.C. Kiss, Droit international des états pour les dommages ďorigine technologique et industrielle 26 (1976); Quentin-Baxter, Second Report on International Liability for the Harmful Consequences arising out of Acts not prohibited by International Law. 2 Y.B. I.L.C. 110, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/346/1981.

31. The Corfu Channel case, 1949 I.CJ. Rep. 22; Trail Smelter Arbitration, 3 U.N.R.I.A.A. 1911–1937(1941); P. Dupuy, infra note 38, at 32, 189; Handl, G., State Liability for Accidental Transnational Damage, 74 AJIL 537 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

32. Report of the UN Conference on the Human Environment, repr. in I.L.M. 1416 (1972).

33. L.B. Sohn, The Stockholm Declaration, 1973 Harv. Inťl L.J. 423, 427; Handl, G., G., State Liability for the Accidental Transnational Environmental Damage by Private Persons, 74 AJIL 525 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lammers, J.G., Balancing the Equities in International Environmental Law, in: The Future of the International Law of the Environmment 153, 157 (R.C.A.D.I., colloque, 1985).Google Scholar

34. U.N. Doc. A/CONF.48/P.C.12, Ann. 15, Para. 65 (1971).

35. Canada and United States Settlement of Gut Dam Claims Arbitration, repr. in 8 I.L.M. 118 (1968); D. Carreau, Droit International 408 (1988); K. Zemanek & J. Salmon, Responsabilitg Internationale 27 (1987).

36. B. Graefrath, Responsility and Damages caused, II R.C.A.D.I. 112 (1984).

37. Art. I, Draft Articles on State Responsibility, 1979 2 Y.B. I.L.C. 9; I. Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law 418–419 (1973).

38. Dupuy, P., International Liability of States for Damage caused by Transfrontier Pollution, in O.E.C.D., Legal Aspects of Transfrontier Pollution 353 (1977)Google Scholar; A.C. Kiss, Survey of Current Developments in International Environmental Law 1976 IUCN Environmental Policy and Law Paper 57; I. H. van Lier, Acid Rain and International Law 100 (1980).

39. Ando, N., The Law of Pollution in International Rivers and Lakes, in R. Zacklin & L. Caflisch (eds.), The Legal Regime of International Rivers and Lakes 331, 34–343 (1981); R. Falk, F. Kratochwil & S.H. Menglovitz, International Law: A Contemporary Perspective 603 (1985).Google Scholar

40. I. van Lier, supra note 38, at 97; Pop, I., Voisinage et bon voisinage 164 (1980).Google Scholar

41. Trail Smelter Arbitration, 3 U.N.R.I.A.A. 1911-1982 (1941).

42. P. Dupuy, supra note 38, at 33: J. Willisch, State Responsibility for Technological in International Law 58–59 (1987).

43. Convention for Settlement of Difficulties Arising from Operation of Smelter at Trail, Apr. 15, 1935, Art.I, 3 U.N.R.I.A.A., 1907–1910.

44. Id. An. IV.

45. Trail Smelter Arbitration, supra note 41, at 1965–1966.

46. supra note 32.

47. P. Dupuy, supra note 38, at 235; K. Zemanek & A.L. Salmon, supra note 7, at 35; A.L. Springer, supranote 30, at 134.

48. L.B. Sohn, supra note 33, at 423,426–427 and 513–514; R. Falk, F. Krachtowil & S.H. Mendelotvitz,supra note 39, at 604.

49. G. Handl supra note 31, at 536; A.C. Kiss & J.D. Sicault, La conférence des Nations Unies sur ľenvironment, 1972 A.F.D.I. 613.

50. Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution, Nov. 13,1979, Art. 15, repr. inl.L.M. 1442 (1979).

51. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, May 1969, Art. 14, U.N. Doc. A/CONF/39/27.

52. Footnote in the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution, repr. in I.L.M. 1445 (1979); G.P. Smith, The United Nations and the Environment: Sometimes a Great Notion, 1984 T.I.L J. 355; A.Fraenkel, The Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution: the Challenge of International Cooperation, 1989 Harv. Inťl LJ. 456.

53. Corfu Channel Case, supra note 31, at 18.

54. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Dec. 10,1982, Art. 198, U.N.Doc.A/CONF/62.122 cocc. 3 and cocc. 8.

55. Clarification No. 13.

56. Trail Smelter Arbitration, supra note 41, at 1911; I. Pop, supra note 40, at 187.

57. G. Handl, supra note 33, at 556; D. Rauschning, Interim Report of the Committee Legal Problems of Continuous and Instanteous Long Distance Air Pollution, I.L.A. Rep., Para. 27 at 211 (1986).

58. G.S. Wetstone, & A. Rosencranz, Acid Rain in Europe and North America: National Responses to an International Problem 3 (1984); I. H. van Lier, supra note 40, at 95; A. Fraenkel, supra note 52, at 453.

59. I.R. Pi nto-Dobernig, Liability for the Harmful Consequences of Instances of Transfrontier Pollution not Prohibited by International Law, 1987 Ö.Z.f.Ö.R. 106.

60. Alabama Arbitration (U.S. v. United Kingdom) (1872), J.B. Moore, I Arbitrations 653 (1898).

61. Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage Resulting from the Exploration and Exploitation of Seabed Mineral Resources, Dec. 17, 1976, repr. I.L.M. 1450(1977); Vienna Convention on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage, May 21, repr. in I.L.M. 727 (1963); Brussels Convention Relating to Civil Liability in the Field of Maritime Carriage of Nuclear Material, Dec. 17,1971, repr. in I.L.M. 277 (1971); Convention on International Liability for Damage caused by Space Objects, June 29, 1971,961 U.N.T.S. 187; G. Handl, supra note 33, at 564; W. Jenks, Liability for Ultra-Hazardous Activities in International Law, I R.C.A.D.I. 1071 (1966).

62. B.E. Felske, Sulphur Dioxide and the Canadian Non-Ferrons Metals Industry, Technical Rep. Nr. 3, at 25 (1981).

63. A.L. Springer, supra note 30, at 13; P. Dupuy, supra note 10, at 353; A.C. Kiss, Droit International de ľEnvironment 106 (1988).

64. U.N. Charter, Art. 74; I.H. van Lier, supra note 38, at 109; M. Sorensen, Principles de Droit International Public, III R.C.A.D.I. 194 (1960).