NOTTEBOHM CASE

(LIECHTENSTEIN v. GUATEMALA)

I. PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS

PARTIES Liechtenstein and Guatemala

ISSUES On Nationality
FORUM International Court of Justice
DATE OF DISCUSSION 18 November 1953

BRIEF FACT SUMMARY

Guatemala has referred to a well-established principle of international law, which it expressed in Counter-
Memorial, that “the bond of nationality between the State and the individual alone confers upon the State
the right of diplomatic protection.” This sentence is taken from a Judgment of the Permanent Court of
International Justice which relates to the form of diplomatic protection constituted by international
judicial proceedings.

Liechtenstein considers itself to be acting in conformity with this principle and contends that Nottebohm
is its national by virtue of the naturalization conferred upon him.

FACTS
Friedrich Nottebohm (P), a German by birth, lived in Guatemala (D) for 34 years, retaining his German
citizenship and family and business ties with it. He however applied for Liechtenstein (P) citizenship a
month after the outbreak of World War II. Nottebohm (P) had no ties with Liechtenstein but intended to
remain in Guatemala. The naturalization application was approved by Liechtenstein and impliedly waived
its three-year. After this approval, Nottebohm (P) travelled to Liechtenstein and upon his return to
Guatemala (D), he was refused entry because he was deemed to be a German citizen. His Liechtenstein
citizenship was not honored. Liechtenstein (P) thereby filed a suit before the International Court to
compel Guatemala (D) to recognize him as one of its national. Guatemala (D) challenged the validity of
Nottebohm’s (P) citizenship, the right of Liechtenstein (P) to bring the action and alleged its belief that
Nottebohm (P) remained a German national.
On 17 December 1951 Liechtenstein (P) filed an application against Guatemala (D) claiming damages in
respect of various measures against persons and property of Nottebohm (P) which Guatemala (D) had
taken and has allegedly contrary to international law. Guatemala (D) contends that the Court was without
jurisdiction. In its judgement, the Court came to a conclusion and rejected the objection on 26 January
1952 that the expiry of the five-year period of compulsory jurisdiction of the Court (for which Guatemala
(D) had accepted).
ISSUES
W/N the claim of the petitioners was inadmissible because of the nationality of the person for whose
protection Liechtenstein had seised the Court.
RULING
The preliminary objection made forth by Guatemala was rejected by the Court as it did not affect any
jurisdiction of the Court in accordance with Article 36, paragraph 2 of the Statute.

II. SECOND PHASE

PARTIES Liechtenstein and Guatemala

ISSUES On Nationality
FORUM International Court of Justice
DATE OF DISCUSSION 6 April 1955

FACTS
Liechtenstein (P) claimed restitution and compensation on the ground that the Government of Guatemala
(D) had acted untowards Mr. Friedrich Nottebohm (P), a citizen of Liechtenstein, contrary to the
international law. In this plea, Guatemala (D) referred to the well-established principle that it is the bond
of nationality between the State and the individual which alone confers upon the State right of diplomatic
protection.
The Liechtenstein Law of 4 January, 1934 follows the procedure of obtaining information concerning the
applicant, and submitting it to the Diet, and if approved, submits a request to the Reigning Prince who
alone is entitled to confer the nationality. Hence, the law requires among other things:
1. The law for the naturalization in Liechtenstein requires the applicant must prove that
acceptance into Home Corporation (Heimat verband) of a Liechtenstein has been promised to
him in case of acquisition of the nationality of the State;
2. That, subject to waiver of this requirement under state conditions, he must prove that he will
lose this former nationality as the result of naturalization
3. That he has been resident in the Principality for at least three years, exceptions may be
applied and in circumstances of special consideration.
4. That he had concluded an agreement concerning liability to taxation with the comptent
authorities and;
5. Has paid naturalization fee
In his application for Naturalization, Nottebohm also applied for previous conferment to a commune of
Liechtenstein, sought dispensation the condition of three years’ prior residence without indicating special
circumstances of waiver, undertook to pay to the Commune, to the State, and an annual naturalization tax,
and deposit security sum. Further, he took the oath of allegiance, and was issued certificate of nationality
to the effect that Nottebohm had been naturalized. On 1 December 1939 he obtained Liechtenstein
passport and had it visa-ed by the Consul General of Guatemala in Zurich, then later returned to
Guatemala at the beginning of 1940 and resumed his former business activities
ISSUE
a. Questions before the Court
- W/N the naturalization thus granted could be validly invoked against Guatemala
- W/N it bestowed upon Liechtenstein a sufficient title to exercise protection in respect of
Nottebohm as against Guatemala and therefore entitled t seise the Cout of a claim relating to
him.
 b. Arguments presented by parties
(Liechtenstein) wanted a declaration and judgement that:
- The Government of Guatemala has breached their obligation under international law in
arresting, detaining expelling, and refusing to readmit Nottebohm and seizing and retaining
his property without compensation.
- For the plea by Guatemala that Nottebohm has not fully exhausted local remedies provided
by Guatemala, Liechtenstein argued that the plea had to be excluded because of the
prorogation of the jurisdiction of the Court.
- The naturalization granted to Nottebohm was in accordance with the municipal law of
Liechtenstein and is not against international law.
(Guatemala) the claim was inadmissible:
- In the principle of international law, it is the bond of nationality between the State and the
individual which alone confers upon the State the right of diplomatic protection
- Principality of Liechtenstein has failed to prove that Nottebohm properly acquired
Liechtenstein nationality in accordance with the law of the Principality, and in the condition
of Nottebohm who was:
o Born at Hamsburg, German
o Still possessed German nationality when applied for naturalization in Liechtenstein
o Took up residence and perpetuate his business and connection in Germany

RULING
In order to resolve the conflict that parties have sought to ascertain whether nationality has been conferred
in circumstances such as to give rise to an obligation on the part of the respondent state to recognize the
effect of that nationality. Factors of habitual residence, center of interest, family ties and participation in
public life are taken into consideration. The Court pointed out that Nottebohm has always retained his
family and business connections with Germany and that there is nothing to indicate in his application for
naturalization in Liechtenstein was motivated by any desire to dissociate himself from the government of
his country.
Naturalization was asked for not so much for the purpose of obtaining a legal recognition of Nottebohm’s
membership in fact in the population of Liechtenstein, as it was to enable him to substitute for his status
as a national of a belligerent State that of a national of a neutral State, with the sole aim of thus coming
within the protection of Liechtenstein but not of becoming wedded to its traditions, its interests, its way of
life or of assuming the obligations—other than fiscal obligations—and exercising the rights pertaining to
the status thus acquired.
Guatemala is under no obligation to recognize a nationality granted in such circumstances. Liechtenstein
consequently is not entitled to extend its protection to Nottebohm vis -a-vis Guatemala and its claim must,
for this reason, be held to be inadmissible.