Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-nptnm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-18T15:23:23.639Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mixed Claims Commission--United States and Germany: Opinion in the Tanker Cases*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 May 2017

Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Judicial Decisions Involving Questions of International Law
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 20 , Issue 4 , October 1926 , pp. 782 - 789
Copyright
Copyright, 1926, by the American Society of International Law

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Established in pursuance of the agreement between the United States and Germany of August 10, 1922. Edwin B, Parker, Umpire; Chandler P. Anderson, American Commissioner; Wilhelm Kiesselbach, German Commissioner; Robert W. Bonynge, American Agent;Karl von Lewinski, German Agent.

References

1 In Docket No. 5323 see Exhibit II, “ Proof of Claim” and affidavit of George D. Ali;affidavits of Montague Piesse, Exhibits J, H-l, and H-2; Director of Ship Purchases, Exhibit J. In Docket No. 5434 see affidavit of J. Howard Pew, Exhibit I. In Docket No. 5469 see affidavit of Clay Arthur Pierce, Exhibit III, page 3. See original consolidated brief in support of claims, pages 17, 30, and 73.

2 The British Reparation Claim against Germany included the value of these tankers with the exception of the Tatarrax, which should have been included but was omitted for the reasons explained in the record (Exhibit J in Docket No. 5323 and claimants΄ consolidated brief, pages 104 and 105).

3 Tabulation of claims printed at bottom of next page.

4 See original consolidated brief in support of claims, pages 8 and 9.

5 See award of umpire in the arbitration of the Longbenton case in Harries v. Shipping Controller (1918), 34 The Times Law Reports 446,118 Law Times Reports 603, and 88 Law Journal Reports 1919 (N. S. 88, K. B.) 576.

6 See affidavit of Montagu Piesse, page 3, Exhibit H-l in Docket No. 5323.

7 Hudson Navigation Co. v. United States (1922), 57 Court of Claims, 411; United States v. New River Collieries Co. (1923), 262 U. S. 341; National City Bank v. United States (1921), 275 Federal Reporter, 855; Standard Oil Company of New Jersey v. Southern Pacific Company (1925), 268 U. S. 146; Brooks-Scanlon Corporation v. United States (1924), 265 U. S. 106.

8 Standard Oil Company of New Jersey v. Southern Pacific Company (1925), 268 U. S. 146.

9 Brooks-Scanlon Corporation v. United States (1924), 265 U. S. 106..

10 See original consolidated brief in support of claims, pages 31, 35, and 36.

11 11 See Opinion in War-Risk Insurance Premium Claims, Decisions and Opinions, pages 33 el seq. [this Journal, Vol. 18, p. 580 et seq.], and in United States of America on behalf of the Eastern Steamship Lines, Inc., Claimant, v. Germany, ibid., pages 71 et seq. [this Journal, Vol. 18, p. 611 et seg.].

12 Article 297 (e) of the Treaty of Versailles carried into the Treaty of Berlin.

13 Paragraph 9 of Annex I to Section I of Part VIII of the Treaty of Versailles carried into the Treaty of Berlin and also Administrative Decision No. VII, Decisions and Opinions, at pages 319 and 320. [This Journal , Vol. 20, pp. 179-180.].

14 See footnote 1 supra.