View this case and other resources at:
Citation. 1997 I.C.J. 7, reprinted in 37 I.L.M. 162 (1998)
Brief Fact Summary. Hungary (P) claimed that Czechoslovakia (D) violated the provisions of a treaty when it appropriated the waters of the Danube River to construct a dam.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. Watercourse states shall participate in the use, development and protection of an international watercourse in an equitable and reasonable manner.
A commentator noted in 1962 that, for the purposes of these borrowing statutes, the courts unanimously hold that a cause of action sounding in tort arises in the jurisdiction where the last act necessary to establish liability occurred; i.e., the jurisdiction in which injury was received.
View Full Point of LawIssue. Shall watercourse states participate in the use, development and protection of an international watercourse in an equitable and reasonable manner?
Held. Yes. Watercourse states shall participate in the use, development and protection of an international watercourse in an equitable and reasonable manner. Hungary (P) was deprived of its rights to an equitable and reasonable share of the natural resources of the Danube by Czechoslovakia (D) and also failed to respect the proportionality that is required by international law. Cooperative administration must be reestablished by the parties of what remains of the project.
Discussion. The Court’s decision was that the joint regime must be restored. In order to achieve most of the Treaty’s objectives, common utilization of shared water resources was necessary. Hence, the defendant was not authorized to proceed without the plaintiff’s consent.