No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Articles of agreement of the International Monetary Fund and the unenforceability of certain exchange contracts
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 May 2009
Extract
In 1947 there came before the Court of Appeals of Amsterdam a case concerning a claim by a resident of the Netherlands against a Hungarian Bank, which claim was based on a contract governed by the law of the State of New York. One of the questions to be decided by the Court was whether the fact that Hungarian exchange control regulations prohibited the Bank from effecting that payment to a non-resident would necessitate the rejection of the plaintiff's claim.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 1955
References
page 148 note 2 De Hongaarse Vennootschap ran Koophandel Pesti Magyar Kereskedelmi Bank (Pester Ungarische Commercial Bank, Hungarian Commercial Bank of Pest), Budapest, v. de N.V. Trust Maatschappij Rokin, Amsterdam, Hof Amsterdam (Tweede Kamer 15 Jan. 1947 NJ 1948, No. 130).
page 150 note 1 Article XX, Section 2(g) of the Fund Agreement provides that: “By their signature of this Agreement, all governments accept it both on their own behalf and in respect of all their colonies, overseas territories, all territories under their protection, suzerainty, or authority and all territories in respect of which they exercise a mandate.”
Accordingly, the Netherlands accepted the Agreement in respect of its overseas territories, at that time consisting of the Netherlands East Indies, Curaçao and Surinam. After the transfer of sovereignty to Indonesia the Netherlands informed the Fund that with the exception of Netherlands New Guinea the former Netherlands East Indies no longer constituted a territory in respect of which the Netherlands accepted the Fund Agreement.
page 151 note 1 Public Law 171, 79th Congress, Chapter 339, 1st Session, H.R. 3314.
page 152 note 1 The Statutory Rules and Orders and Statutory Instruments Revised to December 31, 1948, excerpt from Vol. III, Bretton Woods Agreements.
page 153 note 1 [Published in the Fund's Annual Report, 1949, Appendix XIV, pp. 82–83, see also Rev. Critique de droit int. privé, 1951, pp. 586–587 and Jos. Gold in The Int. and Comp. Law Quarterly, April 1954, p. 362. B. of E.]
page 154 note 1 [According to information received from the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs this interpretation has not been proclaimed by the Netherlands, B. of E.]
page 155 note 1 Proceedings and Documents of U.N. Monetary and Financial Conference, Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, July 1–22, 1944, Dept. of State, vol. 1, pp. 54–55.
page 156 note 1 Loc. cit., p. 334.
page 156 note 2 Arthur Nussbaum, Money in the Law, National and International, a comparative study in the borderline of law and economics, Brooklyn 1950, pp. 542–543.
page 157 note 1 F. A. Mann, The legal aspect of money, with special reference to comparative, private and public international law (Oxford 1953), pp. 381, 382.
page 158 note 1 Op. cit., pp. 543, 544.
page 159 note 1 Op. cit., p. 382.
page 160 note 1 First Annual Report on Exchange Restrictions, International Monetary Fund, March 1, 1950, p. 3.
page 160 note 2 Letter of June 19, 1949, advising members of the interpretation of Article VIII, Sec. 2(b) by the Executive Board.
page 161 note 1 Op. cit., p. 387.
page 162 note 1 Op. cit. p. 348 et seq.
page 164 note 1 G. Delaume, De l'élimination des conflits de lois en matière monétaire réalisée par les Statuts du Fonds Monétaire International, et de ses limites, Journal du droit international, 81me année, no. 2, avril/juin 1954, pp. 332–379.