Barcelona Traction Case

Title of the Case: Barcelona Traction
Year Promulgated/Judgment: First Phase- July 24, 1964;

Second Phase- February 5, 1970
Tribunal: ICJ
Applicant: Belgium
Respondent: Spain
Facts:
The Barcelona Traction, Light, and Power Co. was incorporated and
registered in Canada for the purpose of developing and operating electrical
power in Spain . After the Spanish Civil War, the company was declared
bankrupt by a Spanish court and its assets were seized.
The Belgian Government instituted a case against Barcelona
Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited for damage claimed to have
been caused to Belgian nationals, shareholders in the Canadian Barcelona
Traction Company, by the conduct of various organs of the Spanish State
for the expropriation of a corporation.
The Spanish Government raised four preliminary objections to the
application. The court rejected the first and the second objections
concerning the jurisdiction of the court and ruled on the merits of the third
and the fourth objections. The third objection of the Spanish Government
was that the Belgium Government lacked capacity to submit any claim for
wrongs done to a Canadian company even if the shareholders were
Belgian.
 
Issue: 
1. Does the state of the shareholders of a company have a right of
diplomatic protection if the state whose responsibility is invoked is not the
national state of the company?
2. Is the obligation of Spain an erga omnes where the obligation is towards

the international community?
 
 
Ruling: 
1. No. In order for a state to bring a claim in respect of the breach of an
obligation owed to it, it must first establish its right to do so. This right is
predicated on a showing that the defendant state has broken an obligation
toward the national state in respect of its nationals. Note that there was no
treaty or special agreement of such a kind in force between Belgium and
Spain.
Only the company endowed with legal personality, could take action
in respect of matters that were of a corporate character. A wrong done to
the company frequently caused prejudice to its shareholders, but this did
not imply that both were entitled to claim compensation. Whenever a
shareholder’s interests were harmed by an act done to the company, it was
to the latter than he had to look to institute appropriate action. An act
infringing only the company’s rights did not involve responsibility towards
the shareholders, even if their interests were affected.
The general rule of international law authorized the national State of
the company alone to exercise diplomatic protection for the purpose of
seeking redress. No rule of international law expressly conferred such a
right on the shareholder’s national State.
For the above reasons, the Court is of the opinion that Belgium lacks
standing to bring this action. 
 
2. The concept of erga omnes appears in international law for the first
time in two paragraphs of the judgment in the Barcelona Traction Case
(Second Phase). The relevant text of the paragraphs 33 and 34 follow:
33. In particular, an essential distinction should be drawn between the

obligations of a state towards the international community as a whole, and
those arising vis-a vis another State in the field of diplomatic protection. By
their very nature the former are the concern of all States. In view of the
importance of the rights involved, all States can be held to have a legal
interest in their protection; they are obligations erga omnes.
34. Such obligations derive, for example, in contemporary international law,

from the outlawing of acts of aggression, and of genocide, as also from the
principles and rules concerning the basic rights of human person, including
protection from slavery and racial discrimination.
The facts of the Barcelona Traction Case do not give grounds for a
pronouncement as the one that the court made in the erga omnes
obligations. As seen above, since the Court dealt with Belgium’s right to jus
standi in seeking compensation for Belgian shareholders, the erga
omnes obligations pronouncement is not strongly related to the merits of
the case.

Barcelona Traction Case

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Barcelona Traction Case

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Title of the Case: Barcelona Traction

Year Promulgated/Judgment: First Phase- July 24, 1964;

2. Is the obligation of Spain an erga omnes where the obligation is towards

33. In particular, an essential distinction should be drawn between the

34. Such obligations derive, for example, in contemporary international law,

You might also like