1 Composed for this ease of President Klaestad, Vice President Zafrulla Khan, Judges Basdevant, Hackworth, Winiarski, Badawi, Armand-Ugon, Kojevnikov, Lauterpacht, Moreno Quintana, Córdova, Wellington Koo, Spiropoulos and Spender, and Judges ad hoc Goitein and Zourek.

2 Bulgaria's Declaration of 1921 was “ i n relation to any other Member or State which accepts the same obligation.” Israel's acceptance of 1950 (ratified in 1951) was limited to “all legal disputes concerning situations or facts which may arise after the date of deposit of the instrument of ratification of this declaration.” Israel's Declaration also excepted “any dispute relating to matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of the State of Israel.“

3 Judge ad hoc Goitein gave a separate dissenting opinion. He pointed out that Art. 36, par. 5, was specifically designed to preserve the declarations of acceptance of compulsory jurisdiction despite the termination of the Permanent Court, saying: “The Permanent Court would be dissolved: the declarations would survive. That is why Article 36 (5) was enacted, and there is nothing in the paragraph that even hints that the declarations in question should survive only until the dissolution of the Permanent Court… . “Before December 1955, when Bulgaria was admitted as a Member of the United Nations, she had two clear courses open to her: to refuse to become a Member of the United Nations, or to denounce her Declaration of 1921. She chose to become a Member: she did not renounce her Declaration. Whether the States at San Francisco had authority or not to enact Article 36 (5), Bulgaria ratified what had been done there when she became a Member of the United Nations without denouncing her Declaration.''

4 The Joint Dissent alluded to views expressed by Judge Manley Hudson, in 41 A.J.I.L. 10 (1947), and 40 ibid. 34 (1946), concerning the effect of Art. 36, par. 5.