INTERNATIONAL LAW-JURISDICTION OF INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

Authors

Duncan Noble S.Ed., University of Michigan Law SchoolFollow

Abstract

On May 1, 1951, Iranian legislation enacting the so-called nationalization of the oil industry in Iran received the imperial assent. Thus was set in motion the increasingly bitter course of events whereby Iran has practically cut herself off from the western world. A not insignificant element in these events is the abortive effort of the British to deal with the problem through the International Court of Justice. On July 5, 1951, the United Kingdom obtained an order from the Court designed to maintain the status quo pending further judicial proceedings. In the subsequent course of these proceedings the U .K. made certain requests going to the merits of the case and was met by Iran's refusal to recognize the jurisdiction of the Court. This had the effect of suspending the proceedings on the merits and the controversy over jurisdiction was argued. These arguments were concluded on June 23, 1952. On June 26, Iran, severely hurt economically, and with the fields shut tight, conceded its inability to sell oil abroad since nationalization. Faced with this situation the Court held: it did not have jurisdiction for want of Iran's consent under her Declaration of 1932 made pursuant to Article 36, paragraph 2, of the Statute of the International Court. Anglo-Iranian Oil Co. Case (Jurisdiction), Judgment of July 22, 1952: I. C. J. Reports 1952, p. 93.

Recommended Citation

Duncan Noble S.Ed., INTERNATIONAL LAW-JURISDICTION OF INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE, 51 Mich. L. Rev. 442 (1953).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol51/iss3/13