Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 92 views

    CORFU CHANNEL CASE UK v. Albania, (1949) ICJ Rep. Facts

    Uploaded by

    Ara Kim
    The United Kingdom brought a case against Albania to the ICJ regarding two British destroyers that struck mines in the Corfu Channel in 1946. [1] The ICJ ruled that Albania was responsible for the explosions and had a duty to compensate the UK because the minefield could not have been laid without Albania's knowledge given its geographical position allowing observation of the channel. [2] Albania also failed to warn ships of the danger or notify shipping of the minefield as required by international law. [3] However, the ICJ also ruled that the UK violated Albania's sovereignty by sweeping the channel within its territorial waters without permission.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    CORFU CHANNEL CASE UK v. Albania, (1949) ICJ Rep. Facts

    Uploaded by

    Ara Kim
    92 views2 pages
    The United Kingdom brought a case against Albania to the ICJ regarding two British destroyers that struck mines in the Corfu Channel in 1946. [1] The ICJ ruled that Albania was responsible for the explosions and had a duty to compensate the UK because the minefield could not have been laid without Albania's knowledge given its geographical position allowing observation of the channel. [2] Albania also failed to warn ships of the danger or notify shipping of the minefield as required by international law. [3] However, the ICJ also ruled that the UK violated Albania's sovereignty by sweeping the channel within its territorial waters without permission.

    Original Title

    UK vs, Albania

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The United Kingdom brought a case against Albania to the ICJ regarding two British destroyers that struck mines in the Corfu Channel in 1946. [1] The ICJ ruled that Albania was responsible for the explosions and had a duty to compensate the UK because the minefield could not have been laid without Albania's knowledge given its geographical position allowing observation of the channel. [2] Albania also failed to warn ships of the danger or notify shipping of the minefield as required by international law. [3] However, the ICJ also ruled that the UK violated Albania's sovereignty by sweeping the channel within its territorial waters without permission.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    92 views2 pages

    CORFU CHANNEL CASE UK v. Albania, (1949) ICJ Rep. Facts

    Uploaded by

    Ara Kim
    The United Kingdom brought a case against Albania to the ICJ regarding two British destroyers that struck mines in the Corfu Channel in 1946. [1] The ICJ ruled that Albania was responsible for the explosions and had a duty to compensate the UK because the minefield could not have been laid without Albania's knowledge given its geographical position allowing observation of the channel. [2] Albania also failed to warn ships of the danger or notify shipping of the minefield as required by international law. [3] However, the ICJ also ruled that the UK violated Albania's sovereignty by sweeping the channel within its territorial waters without permission.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    CORFU CHANNEL CASE UK v. Albania, [1949] ICJ Rep.

    FACTS:

    On October 22nd, 1946, two British cruisers and two destroyers entered the North Corfu
    Strait. One of the destroyers, the Saumarez, struck a mine and was gravely damaged. The other
    destroyer, the Volage, was sent to her assistance and, while towing her, struck another mine
    and was also seriously damaged. Forty-five British officers and sailors lost their lives, and forty-
    two others were wounded.

    An Albanian battery had fired in the direction of two British cruisers. The United
    Kingdom Government had protested, stating that innocent passage through straits is a right
    recognized by international law. The Albanian Government had replied that foreign warships
    and merchant vessels had no right to pass through Albanian territorial waters without prior
    authorization. United Kingdom Government had replied that if, in the future, fire was opened
    on a British warship passing through the channel, the fire would be returned.

    After the explosions, the United Kingdom Government sent a Note to Tirana announcing
    its intention to sweep the Corfu Channel shortly. The reply was that this consent would not be
    given unless the operation in question took place outside Albanian territorial waters and that
    any sweep undertaken in those waters would be a violation of Albania’s sovereignty.

    The sweep effected by the British Navy took place on November 12th/13th 1946, in
    Albanian territorial waters and within the limits of the channel previously swept.

    ISSUE:

    1. Whether or not Albania is responsible for the explosions, and has a duty to pay
    compensation.
    2. Whether or not United Kingdom violated international law by the acts of its Navy in
    Albanian waters, first on the day on which the explosions occurred and, secondly, on
    November 12th and 13th, 1946, when it undertook a sweep of the Strait.

    RULING:

    The Court concluded that the laying of the minefield could not have been accomplished
    without the knowledge of Albania. It was her duty to notify shipping and especially to warn the
    ships proceeding through the Strait on October 22nd of the danger to which they were
    exposed. In fact, nothing was attempted by Albania to prevent the disaster, and these grave
    omissions involve her international responsibility.

    The assertion of ignorance a priori improbable because laying of the mines took place in
    a period in which it was requiring prior authorization before ships could enter. Moreover, when
    the Albanian Government had become fully aware of the existence of a minefield, it protested
    strongly against the activity of the British Fleet, but not against the laying of the mines, though
    this act, if effected without her consent, would have been a very serious violation of her
    sovereignty. She did not notify shipping of the existence of the minefield, as would be required
    by international law, Likewise, she did not undertake any of the measures of judicial
    investigation which would seem to be incumbent on her in such a case.

    Geographically, the channel is easily watched. It is dominated by heights offering


    excellent observation points, and it runs close to the coast. The naval experts appointed by the
    Court reported, after enquiry and investigation on the spot, that if a normal look-out was kept
    at Cape Kiephali, Denta Point, and St. George’s Monastery, and if the lookouts were equipped
    with binoculars, under normal weather conditions for this area, the mine-laying operations
    must have been noticed by these coastguards.

    You might also like