Article 26 of the Mandate by which Great Britain administered Palestine required disputes between league members to be submitted to the Permanent Court if they “cannot be settled by negotiation.” In the Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions case, Great Britain contended that discussions with Greece, the complainant, had been so brief as not to amount to negotiations, insisting that in negotiations parties must at least define their positions and consider each other's views. Although intergovernmental exchanges had not reached this point, the Court held that prior discussions between Mavrommatis and British authorities had so defined the relevant issues that the Greek government could rely on these talks, in conjunction with its own protests, to satisfy the negotiations requirement.
Judge Moore, in dissent, believed that negotiations should be limited to intergovernmental discussions because issues raised by individuals cannot define the positions open to governments. Moreover, negotiations should proceed in an ordered, even rational manner.