Book Reviews : The Jurisprudence of the World Court. Volume I. The Permanent Court of International Justice (1922-1940). By J. H. W. Verzijl [Leyden: A. W. Sijthoff, 1965. Dfl. 64.50]
| Date | 01 April 1967 |
| DOI | 10.1177/004711786700300105 |
| Published date | 01 April 1967 |
| Author | D.H.N. Johnson |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
72
BOOK
REVIEWS
The
Jurisprudence
of
the
World
Court.
Volume
I.
The
Permanent
Court
of
International
Justice
(1922-1940).
By
J.
H.
W.
Verzijl
[Leyden:
A.
W.
Sijthoff,
1965.
Dfl.
64.50].
The.autonomous
region
of
Eastern
Carelia,
the
question
of
Jaworzina,
the
Mosual
vilayet,
the
Chorzow
factory,
the
monastery
of
Saint-Naoum,
the
minority
schools
of
Upper
Silesia
and
Albania,
the
steamship
Lotus,
the
lighthouses
on
the
Turkish
coast,
the
problems
of
Peter
Pazmany
Univer,sity,
the
cases
of
Pajzs,
Csaky
and
Esterhazy
as
&dquo;a
judicial
epilogue
to
the
drama
of
the
Hungarian
Optants&dquo;
(p.438),
the
affairs
of
Prince
von
Pless,
the Statute
of
Memel,
the
courts
of
Danzig
and
the
legislative
decreees
of
that
Free
City,
the
phosphates
in Morocco,
the
issue
of
the
Panevezys-
Saldutiskis
Railway
and
the
difficulties
of
the
Electricity
Company
of
Sofia
and
Bulgaria
-
these
names,
and
many
others
like
them,
mean
little
enough
to
modern
students
of
international
affairs.
Yet
only
a
generation
ago
these
were
the
titles
of
disputes
of
sufficient
scale
to
attract
the
attention
of
the
Permanent
Court
of
International
Justice,
that
experiment
in
international
adjudication
which
was
provided
for
by
the
Covenant
of
the
League
of
Nations
of
1919,
was
actually
created
by
a
Statute
approved
in
1920,
began
its
effective
life
in
1922,
foundered
in
1940
and
was
formally
wound
up
in
1946,
being
succeeded
by
the
present
International
Court
of
Justice.
The
names
mentioned
above
do
of
course
mean
something
to
the
international
lawyer,
in
that
he
is
at
least
aware
that
they
constitute
precedents
of
which
he
must
take
account,
notwithstanding
the
provision
which
appears
in
the
Statute
of
the
present
Court,
as
it
did
in
that
of
its
predecessor,
to
the
effect
that
&dquo;The
decision
of
the
Court
has
no
binding
force
except
between
the
parties
and
in
respect
of
that
particular
case&dquo;.
Nevertheless,
even
the
international
lawyer
of
today
cannot
easily
recollect
the
background
and
the
exact
circumstances
of
these
mysterious
disputes
which
now
seem
more
than
ever
to
belong
to
an
era
that
is
irretrievably
past.
It
is
the
great
merit
of
this
book,
to
which
Professor
Dr.
Maarten
Bos,
(Director
of
the
International
Law
Institute
at
Utrecht
University
and
successor
to
Professor
Verzijl
in
the
chair
of
international
law
at
that
University)
contributes
an
illuminating
Preface,
that
it
brings
to
life
these
vanished
controversies
and
renders
them
full
of
interest
and
meaning.
Professor
Verzijl,
who
was
appointed
to
the
chair
at
Utrecht
in
1919
and
held
it
until
1958,
i.s
best
known
for
his
great
work
Le
droit
des
prises
de
la
grande
guerre
(Leyden,
1924).
But
he
also
wrote
a
great
many
articles
in
the
inter-war
period,
a
substantial
pro,portion
of
which
were
concerned
with
the
contentious
cases
decided
and
the
advisory
opinions
rendered
by
the
Permanent
Court
of
International
Justice.
It
is
these
articles
which
have been
collected
together
-
and
where
necessary
translated
into
English
-
and
which
now
constitute
this
volume.
Professor
Verzijl
has
continued
to
write
extensively
about
the
International
Court
of
Justice,
and
his
articles
on
the
present
Court
are
being
similarly
published
in
Volume
11
of
this
series.
But
it
is
no
disrespect
to
Professor
Verzijl
to
say
that
it
is
this
first
volume
which
is
likely
to
be
the
most
valuable,
given
the
much
greater
accessibility
in
many
libraries
of
the
decisions
of
the
present
Court
and
of
commentaries
upon
those
decisions.
The
articles
herein
published
indeed
amount
to
&dquo;a
case
by
case
commentary&dquo;,
to
quote
the
sub-title
of
the
book.
The
facts
are
convenientlv
summarised,
and
the
Court’s
judgments,
orders
and
opinions
are
analysed
and
dissected,
sometimes
critically,
but
always
politely
and
with
full
under.standing
of
the
difficulties
of
the
international
judicial
process.
The
same
treatment
is
extended
to
the
separate
and
dissenting
opinions
of
individual
judges.
In
addition
to
articles
on
particular
disputes
there
are
articles
in
the
nature
of
assessments
of
the
Court’s
problems
and
its
manner
of
overcoming
them.
The
first
article
in
the
collection,
for
instance.
i:3
a
summary
of
the
Court’s
progress
between
1922
and
1926.
A
similar
weighing-up
entitled
&dquo;Fifteen
Years
of
International
Adjudication&dquo;
appeared
in
1937.
In
this
assessment
Professor
Verzijl,
on
the
whole,
gave
the
Court
fairly
high
marks,
although
he
criticised
it
for
departing
from
the
self-confident
attitude
it
had
adopted
towards
litigant
parties
in
the
To continue reading
Request your trial