About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

12 Int'l Bus. Law. 337 (1984)
The Awards of the Iran-US Claims Tribunal

handle is hein.journals/ibl12 and id is 339 raw text is: (( Arbitration THE AWARDS OF THE IRAN-US CLAIMS TRIBUNAL Seen in connection with the Law of the Netherlands The two articles which follow were published originally in the Dutch legal periodical Nederlands Juristen Blad. The reprinting of these articles is by kind permission of the Board of Editors of that periodical. L. HARDENBERG, member of the Amsterdam bar, practising in Amsterdam On 14 July, 1983 a draft bill was presented to the Lower House of the Dutch Parliament, concerning the applicability of Netherlands law to the awards of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal in The Hague.' According to the Explanatory Notes, there is uncertainty as to the nature of the proceedings before the Tribunal and of its awards, which the draft intends to end by declaring the awards of the Tribunal to be arbitral awards within the meaning of the Dutch Code of Civil Procedure. This implies that the Tribunal will be sub- ject to Dutch arbitration law as if it were a civil arbitral tribunal, but this consequence is considerably li- mited by the provisions that the com- petence of the Tribunal cannot be challenged (article 2) and that the nullity of its awards can be invoked before the High Court of The Hague only, if the proceedings have been conducted in a manner which costi- tutes a manifest breach of the princi- ples of proper administration of jus- tice, or if the award is manifestly contrary to public order or morals (articles 4 and 5). Finally, only arti- cles 639 (deposit with Court Reg- istry), 642 (exequatur), 644 (enforce- ment) and 645 (disputes pertaining to the enforcement) of the Code of Civil Procedure shall apply (article 3). The Tribunal came into being by The articles discuss the question whether a proposal for draft legislation concern- ing the applicable law on the US/Iran claim-awards should be passed in the Dutch parlia- an international treaty, to which The Netherlands orginally was not a par- ty. Consequently the question arises whether there is a reason for the Dutch legislator to unilaterally re- medy existing or supposed uncer- tainities in that treaty and, if so, whether it is within his power to do so. In this respect he is not always reserved. One may recall the mis- sionary's zeal with which this legis- lator took possession of an artificial island outside Dutch territorial wa- ters, the so-called REM-Island, by an Act of Parliament since under ius gentium he could not tolerate the legal vacuum 'where no rule of national law would apply'.2 There- fore, if the present draft-bill were enacted despite its not being the proper solution, immediately the question would arise, what effect it could have. It is generally known, that the se- rious conflicts between Iran and the United States, during which 52 Americans were taken hostage, found a peaceful solution through the good offices of Algeria. This solution was laid down in the Declaration of the Government of the Democratic and Popular Republic of Algeria of 19 January, 1981' - in its form a un- ilateral statement but according to its headings based on 'formal adher- ences received from Iran and the Un- ited States'. This international treaty under the law of nations, aimed, to put it briefly, at the restoration by the Un- ited States of the financial position of Iran as it existed prior to 14 Novem- ment and enter into force. The proposal has been accepted in the meantime by the Second Chamber of the House and is now sine die pending before the First Chamber. ber, 1979 and 'to terminate all litigation as be- tween the Government of each par- ty and the nationals of the other, and to bring about the settlement and termination of all such claims through binding arbitration'.4 In this context the United States agreed to terminate all legal proceedings in the United States courts involv- ing claims of United States persons and institutions against Iran and its state enterprises, to nullify all attachments and judgments obtained therein, to prohibit all further litigation based on such claims and to bring about the ter- mination of such claims through binding arbitration.'5 Disputes between Iran and the United States as to the interpreta- tion or execution of this agreement are to be submitted exclusively to the same Tribunal, which is also to de- cide the litigation referred to above.6 This Tribunal was constituted by the second Declaration of Algeria con- cerning the settlement of claims by the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, hereinafter the 'Claims Settlement Agreement', which like the first Dec- laration, is based on the formal adherences of these two states.7 The seat of the Tribunal, which consists of an equal number of Iranian, US and neutral members is in The Hague.8 There is no appeal from its decisions and awards which can be enforced all over the world.9 A Dutch author may be forgiven INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS LAWYER September 1984 337

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most