https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/92/7377.

pdf

pp.1-4

Task no 1. Answer the questions. Elaborate on your answers.

1. When were the proceedings instituted?
The proceedings were instituded on 2 July 1993.
2. What was the legal issue?

"whether the Republic of Hungary was entitled to suspend and subsequently abandon, in 1989, the works on
the Nagymaros Project and on the part of the Gacikovo Project for which the Treaty attributed responsibility
to the Republixc of hungary”

whether the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic was entitled to proceed, in November 1991, to the
'provisional solution' and to put into operation from October 1992this system".

"what are the legal effects of the notification, on 19 May 1992, of the termination of the Treaty by the
Republic of Hungary". (?)

3. When was the treaty signed? When did the Treaty enter into force?
The treaty was signed in 1977 and the 1977 Treaty entered into force on 30 June 1978.

4. Which countries signed the Treaty?

The Treaty was signed by Hungarian People’s Republic and the Czechoslovak People’s Republic.
5. What did the Treaty entitle the parties to do?

The Project was thus to have taken the form of an integrated joint project with the two contracting parties on
an equal footing in respect of the financing, construction and operation of the works. Its single and
indivisible nature was to have been realized through the Joint Contractual Plan which complemented (the
Treaty. In particular, Hungary would have had control of the sluices (vandentakis, šliužas) at Dunakiliti and
the works at Nagymaros, whereas Czechoslovakia would have had control of the works at Gabcikovo.

6. What was the aim of the System of Locks?

To attain the broad utilization of natural resources of the Bratislava-Budapest section of Danube rover for
the development of water resources, energy, transport, argiculture and other sectors of the national ecenomy
of the Contracting Parties.
Danube and the protection of the areas along the banks against flooding.
7. Which sector of the Danube river is this case concerned with?

The sector of the Danutbe river with which this case is concerned is a stretch of approximately 200
kilometres, between Bratislava in Slovakia and Budapest in Hungary.

8. Which country became the official successor?

1
Slovakia, as successor to Czechoslovakia, became a party to the Treaty of 16 September 1977 as from 1
January 1993.
Slovakia became an official successor.
9. Did anything change after the split?

In the Special Agreement thereafter concluded between Hungary and Slovakia the Parties agreed to establish
and implement) a temporary water management regime for the Danube.

10. Which party and when decided to terminate the treaty?

Hungarian Government transmitted to the Czechoslovak Government a Note Verbale terminating the
1977 Treaty with effect from 25 May 1992.
11. What was Hungary‘s ground?
Vienna Convention of 1969 on the Law of Treaties, as argued by the Parties. Concerns expressed by
Hungary for its natural environment in the region.
12. When did the Hungarian Government transmit to the Czechoslovak Government a Note terminating
the 1977 Treaty?

On 19 May 1992, the Hungarian Government transmitted to the Czechoslovak Government a Note Verbale
terminating the 1977 Treaty with effect from 25 May 1992.

13. Did Hungary's notification of termination of the 1977 Treaty legally terminate it?
Hungary's notification of termination of the 1977 Treaty and related instruments on 19 May 1992 did not
legally terminate them (and that they are consequently still in force and govern the relationship between the
Parties); and that Slovakia, as succe:ssor to Czechoslovakia became a party to the Treaty of 1977.
14. Under what conditions Hungary could have terminated the contract?
"grave and imminent peril"; the act being challenged must have been the "only means" of
safeguarding that interest; that act must not have "seriously impair[ed] an essential interest" of the State
towards which the obligation existed
15. What is Variant C?

An alternative solution which entailed a unilateral diversion of the Danube by Czechoslovakia on its
territory some 10 kilometres upstream of Dunakiliti. In its final stage, Variant C included the constniction at
Cunovo of an overflow dam and a levee linking that dam to the south bank of the bypass canal. Provision
was made for ancillary works.

Alternative provisional solution.

16. Was it legitimate?

The Court accortiingly concludes that Czechoslovakia, in putting Variant C into operation, was not applying
the 1977 Treaty but, on the contrary, violated certain of its express provisions, and, in so doing, committed
an internationally wrongful act.

17. Was Czechoslovakia entitled to put into operation its "provisional solution" from October 1992?

2
The court found that Czechoslovakia was entitled to proceed to Variant C, in 1991, insofar as it then
confined itself to undertaking works which did not predetermine the final decision to be taken by it. On the
other hand, Czechoslovakia was not entitled to put that Variant into operation froin October 1992.

18. When did the court visit the area?

Visit to the area was After setting out the text of the to the area, from 1 to 4 April 1997.
19. What is the court‘s opinion on the newly developed norms of environmental law in Hungary? Is it
relevant for the implementation of the Treaty?

The Court notes that neither of the Parties contended that new peremptory norms of environmental law had emerged since the
conclusion of the 1977 Treaty; and the Court will consequently not be required to examine the scope of Article 64 of the Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties (which treats of the voidance and termination of a treaty because of the emergence of a new
peremptory norm of general international law (ius cogens)).On the other hand, the Court wishes to point out that newly developed
norms of environmental law are relevant for the implementation of the Treaty and that .the parties could, by agreement,
incorporate them through the application of Articles 15, 19 and 20 of the Treaty.

Finally, the Court is of the view that although it has found that both Hungary and Czechoslovakia failed to comply with their
obligations under the 1977 Treaty, this reciprocal wrongful conduct did not bring the Treaty to an end nor justify its termination.

20. What is problematic in reconciling economic development with environmental protection?

The court found that the Parties, in order to reconcile economic development with protection of the
environment, "should look afresh at the effects on the environment of the operation of the Gabcikovo
power plant. In particular they must find a satisfactory solution for the volume of water to be released into
the old bed of the Danube and into the side- arms of the river.

21. Summarise the judgements of the Court.

The Court observes that, even if a state of necessity is found to exist, it is not a ground for the
termination of a treaty. It may only be invoked to exonerate from its responsibility a State which has
failed to implement a treaty.
22. What laws were applied to come to the above-mentioned judgements?
The Court observes that it is not necessary to determine whether there is a principle of international law or a
general principle of law of "approximate application" because, even if such a principle existed, it could
by definition only be employed within the limits of the treaty in question. In the view of the Court.
The Court observes that, even if a state of necessity is found to exist, it is not a ground for the
termination of a treaty. It may only be invoked to exonerate from its responsibility a State which has
failed to implement a treaty.

Task no 2. Match the terms with their meanings.

1 entitled E A legal action

2 To find G B involving only one group or country
3 judgement D C to find a way in which two situations or beliefs that
3
 are opposed to each other
can agree and exist together
4 In good faith F D official legal decision
5 unilateral B E feeling that you have the right to do or have what
you want without having to work for it
or deserve it, just because of who you are
6 To reconcile C F sincerely and honestly
7 proceedings A G to make a judgment in a court of law

Task no 3. Match the terms with their meanings.

1 To denounce A to start or cause a system, rule, legal action,
E etc. to exist
2 to dwell upon B B to think or talk about something a lot of
the time
3 imminent F C cite or appeal to (someone or something) as an
authority for an action or in support of an argument

4 To invoke C D existing in a particular place or at

a particular time
To institute A E to criticize something or
someone strongly and publicly; publicly
declare to be wrong or evil
6 prevailing D F Likely or certain to happen very soon

Task no 4. Match the words on the left and on the right to make word partnerships from the
article.

Lithuanian
1 The court I/F A the power plants Teismas nustatė
2 to lay down B B in the Treaty Sutartyje nustatyti

3 To be K C legal effect galioti

4 To negotiate G D with obligations Sąžiningai derėtis
5 the court F/I E economic Teismas nusprendžia
development
6 To reconcile E F holds Suderinti ekonominę plėtrą
7 To have C G in good faith Turėti teisinę galią
8 To institute J H into force Iškelti bylą
9 To enter H I found that įsigalioti
10 To impair L J proceedings Pabloginti vandens kokybę

4
 11 compliance D K in force Įsipareigojimų laikymasis
12 to put into operation A L the quality of Pradėti eksploatuoti jėgaines
water

Task no 5. What are the following words in English? (Find the answers from the summary).

to provide, compliance with obligations, unilateral measure, with effect from

25 May 1992, to enter into force (Treaty), to have legal effect, to govern
relationship, to suspend and subsequently abandon, to be in force, power
plant, having regard to Article 2, to impair, to set forth
1. sustabdyti ir to pasekoje nutraukti – to suspend and subsequently abandon
2. galioti – to be in force
3. reglamentuoti santykius – to govern relationship
4. vienašalė priemonė – unilateral measure
5. jėgainė - power plant
6. atsižvelgiant į antrą straipsnį – having regard on Article 2
7. turėti teisinę galią – to have legal effect
8. Įsigalioti – to enter into force (Treaty)
9. pabloginti - to impair
10. numatyti (sutartyje) – to provide
11. Įsipareigojimų laikymasis – compliance with obligations
12. nustatyti (sutartyje) - to set forth
13. įsigaliosiantis – with effect form 25 May 1992

Task no 6. True or False. Explain why.

The Court found that each Party must compensate the other Party for the damage caused by its
conduct. True ,, hat each Party must compensate the other Party for the clamage caused by its conduct; and that the accounts
for the construction and operation of the works mlJst be settled in accordance with the relevant provisions of the 1977 Treaty and
its related instruments. “

The proceedings were instituted by Hungary. FALSE. Th.e Court begins by recalling that proceedings had beell
instituted on 2 July 1993 by a joint notification, by Hungaiy and Slovakia, of a Special Agreement, signed at Brussels on 7 April
1993

The aim of 1977 Treaty was the broad utilization of the natural resources of the Danube river for
the development of water resources, energy, transport, agriculture and other sectors of the
national economy of a single country. FALSE. ,, he broad utilization of the natural resources of the Bratislava-
Budapest section of the Danube river for the development of water resources? energy, transport, agriculture and other sectors of
the national economy of the Contracting Parties “

The Treaty provided for the building of a lock at Gabcikovo (in Czechoslovak territory). FALSE. ,,
The 1977 Treaty describes the principal works to be constructed in pursuance of the Project. It provided for the building of two
series of locks, one at Gabcikovo (in Czechoslovak territory) and the other at Nagymaros (in Hungarian territory) “

5
The Contracting Parties were not equally financially liable for the works provided in 1977 Treaty.
FALSE. The treaty provided for the construction, financing and management of the works on a joint basis in which the
Parties participated in equal measure. Gal dar tiks sitas :,, The Court observes that the Project was thus to have taken the form of
an integrated joint project with the two contracting parties on an equal footing in rc:spect of the financing, construction and
operation of the works “

Joint Contractual Plan which complemented the Treaty sets forth single and indivisible nature of
the project. TRUE. Its single and indivisible nature was to have been realized through the Joint Contract~lalPlan which
complemented the Treaty. In particular, Hungary would have had control of the sluices at Dunakiliti and the works at Nagymaros,
whereas Czechoslovakia would ha.ve had control of the works at Gabcikovo.

In 1983 Hungary unilaterally decided to slow down the work. FALSE. On Hungary's initiative, the two
partier; first agreed, by two Protocols signed on 10 October 1983 to slow the work down

"Variant C" means that Czechoslovakia unilaterally diverted (vienpusi6kai nukreiptas) the Danube
on its territory some 10 kilometres upstream of Dunakiliti. TRUE. ,, an alternative solution subsequently
known as "Variant C", entailed a unilateral diversion of the Danube by Czechoslovakia on its territory some 10 kilometres
upstream of Dunakilit”

On 19 May 1992, the Hungarian Government transmitted to the Czechoslovak Government a Note
Verbale terminating the 1977 Treaty with effect from 25 May 1992. True ,, Discussions continued between
the two parties but to no avail, and, on 19 May 1992, the Hungarian Government transmitted to the Czechoslovak Government a
Note Verbale terminating the 1977 Treaty with effect from 25 May 1992.”

A determination of whether a convention is or is not in force, and whether it has or has not been
properly suspended or denounced was made pursuant (siekiantis) to the law of treaties. TRUE ,, A
determination of whether a convention is or is not in force, and whether it has or has not been properly suspended or denounced, is
to be made pursuant to the law of treaties. “ r denounced, is to be made pursuant to the law of treaties. On the other hand, an
evaluation of the extent to which the suspension or denunciation of a convention, seen as incompatible with the law of treaties,
involves the respoiisibility of the State which proceeded to it, is to be made under the law of State responsibility. Nežinau

The Court agreed that environmental interests expressed by Hungary can be considered
“essential interest” of the State(šitas true) but it admitted that they were not imminent
(neišvengiamas). True. The court concers expressed by Hungary for its natural environment in the
region affected by the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project related to an “essential interest” of that State
as well the Law Commission found that Hungary’s interes must have been thretened by a “grave
and imminent peril”

Task No 7. Choose 10 new words to learn from these two categories: geographical terms and
legal terms.

Legal terms Geograhphy/environment

related vocabulary
With effect from … Stretch - ruožas
Compliance with obligations River gradient
To set forth Alluvial plain of gravel.
Unilateral measure Sand sediment
Exonerate from its sluices by Gabija
responsibility Paulauskaitė
Gabija Paulauskaitė9:59
AM
sluices
6
7