The Republic of Alquisada
State Responsibility
CASE Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Co Ltd Case (Second Phase): Belgium v Spain LEGAL BASIS Comments: The International Law Comission defined international law crime as an internationally wrongful act which results from the breach by a State of an obligation so essential for the protection of fundamental interests of the international community that its breach is recognized as a crime by that community as a whole and provided some examples of international crimes and one of which is serious breaches of the law on peace and security, such as that prohibiting aggression. Article 34 of the Final Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (ILC): “a delinquent state must make full reparation for the injury caused by the commission of the internationally wrongful act…” Free Zones of Upper Savoy and the District of Gex Case: France v Switzerland It is a well established principle of international law that no government can be held responsible for the act of rebellious bodies of men committed in violation of its authority, where it itself is guilty of no breach of good faith, or of no negligence in suppressing insurrection. Article 4 on of the International Law Commission Final Draft Articles on State Responsibility for internationally wrongful acts provides that: 1. The conduct of any State organ shall be considered as an act of that State under international law, whether the APPLICATION

Charzow Factory Case: Germany v Poland

Mallen Claim: Mexico v USA

” There could be no liability whatever for such misdeeds if the view were taken that any acts committed by soldiers in contravention of instructions must always be considered as personal acts. or to its social or material interests. and whatever its character as an organ of the central government or of a territorial unit of State. and in the presence of. at pleasure. and to expel or deport from the State. The Judicial Community of the Privy Council stated: “One of the rights possessed by the supreme power in every State is the right to refuse to permit an alien to enter that State. especially if it considers his presence in the State opposed to its peace.Attorney General for Canada v Cain organ exercises legislative. executive. order and good Government. a commanding officer. even a friendly alien. to annex what conditions it pleases to the permission to enter it.” Youman’s Claim: USA v Mexico Judgment: “an opinion rendered by Umpire Lieber in which effect is evidently given to the well-recognized rule if international law that a Government is not responsible for malicious acts of soldiers committed in their private capacity. judicial or any other functions. and therefore it could not be claimed that their acts were of a personal nature. . whatever position it holds in the organization of the State. Comment: The Commission emphasized that the soldiers were on duty and under the immediate supervision.