The Chorzow Factory case involved a nitrate factory in Upper Silesia owned by German companies. When the region was transferred to Poland after World War I, the Polish government demolished the factory despite demands to spare it. Germany filed a case in the ICJ seeking monetary damages for the German companies. The ICJ ruled that monetary damages were appropriate since restoring the factory was no longer possible. It also found that Germany had standing to file on behalf of the companies. The ICJ further ruled that Poland was liable under the Geneva Convention for damages because no proper transfer of rights over the factory had occurred before its demolition. The case was decided in Germany's favor.
The Chorzow Factory case involved a nitrate factory in Upper Silesia owned by German companies. When the region was transferred to Poland after World War I, the Polish government demolished the factory despite demands to spare it. Germany filed a case in the ICJ seeking monetary damages for the German companies. The ICJ ruled that monetary damages were appropriate since restoring the factory was no longer possible. It also found that Germany had standing to file on behalf of the companies. The ICJ further ruled that Poland was liable under the Geneva Convention for damages because no proper transfer of rights over the factory had occurred before its demolition. The case was decided in Germany's favor.
The Chorzow Factory case involved a nitrate factory in Upper Silesia owned by German companies. When the region was transferred to Poland after World War I, the Polish government demolished the factory despite demands to spare it. Germany filed a case in the ICJ seeking monetary damages for the German companies. The ICJ ruled that monetary damages were appropriate since restoring the factory was no longer possible. It also found that Germany had standing to file on behalf of the companies. The ICJ further ruled that Poland was liable under the Geneva Convention for damages because no proper transfer of rights over the factory had occurred before its demolition. The case was decided in Germany's favor.
FACTS: 1. March 5, 1915 The German Government (called Reich) entered into a partnership contract with a private German company Bayerische (pronounced as Ba-yeh-sha) for the construction of a nitrate factory at Chorzow in Upper Silesia, which at the time of agreement was a part of the German territory. 2. December 24, 1919 Reichs majority interest in the factory was ceded to Oberschlesische (pronounced as O-ber-schley-si-sha) (end result: MGT of Factory Bayerische; Ownership Reich; Majority Dividend Oberschlesische) 3. Sameday, Dec. 24, 1919, - Oberschlesische transferred some of its interest to another company Treuhand (pronounced as Troy-hand) 4. The factory continued to function until May 15, 1922 when Germany signed a Convention in Geneve (called Geneva Convention) effectively transferring Chorzow, Upper Silesia to the Polish jurisdiction. 5. Immediately taking control over Upper Silesia after the signing of Geneva Convention, the Polish government demolished the factory despite demands from the three companies to have the factory spared. 6. The Reich filed this case in the ICJ for collection of monetary damages from Polish government for the injury that the three German companies sustained due to the demotion of the factory. ISSUES: 1. Is the collection for monetary damages the right case to be filed? 2. If so, has the German government locus standii to file the case? 3. Is the Polish government liable for monetary damages? HELD: 1. AFFIRMATIVE. The original action to be filed must be restitution which involves restoring the subject matter under dispute to its original state. However, in cases like this one where restoring the demolished factory is no longer possible, the only action that may be filed is collection for monetary damages. 2. AFFIRMATIVE. Despite not being a direct party that sustained loss in the demolition of the factory, the German government has the legal standing to file in the ICJ in behalf of the German companies who sustained the injuries. 3. AFFIRMATIVE. Article 23 of the Geneva Convention declares that the State which failed to apply its provisions shall be liable for monetary damages. And under the agreement, it is expressly provided that the infrastructures in Upper Silesia, including the factory, shall not automatically be under Polish ownership unless proper ceding of rights and interest is done. And since no proper ceding of interest transpired between the three companies and the Polish government before the demolition was carried out, the three companies sustained injuries which should be monetarily compensated by Polish government. Case decided in favor of Germany.