«Статус Конвенции о привилегиях и иммунитетах Объединенных Наций (Лейк Саксесс, Нью-Йорк, 13 февраля 1946 года)» [рус., англ.] (по состоянию на 16.09.2010)

vides for the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in the case of differences arising out of the interpretation or application of the Convention, and declares that the consent of all the parties to the dispute is necessary for the submission of any particular dispute to the International Court of Justice for settlement.
Furthermore, the State of Qatar does not consider the advisory opinion given by the International Court of Justice shall be accepted as decisive as indicated in above-mentioned section (30).

Republic of Korea
Reservation:
[The Government of the Republic of Korea declares] that the provision of paragraph (c) of section 18 of article V shall not apply with respect to Korean nationals.

Romania <11>
The Romanian People's Republic does not consider itself bound by the terms of section 30 of the Convention which provide for the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court in differences arising out of the interpretation or application of the Convention; with respect to the competence of the International Court in such differences, the Romanian People's Republic takes the view that, for the purpose of the submission of any dispute whatsoever to the Court for a ruling, the consent of all the parties to the dispute is required in every individual case. This reservation is equally applicable to the provisions contained in the said section which stipulate that the advisory opinion of the International Court is to be accepted as decisive.

Russian Federation <11>, <16>
The Soviet Union does not consider itself bound by the provision of section 30 of the Convention which envisages the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court, and in regard to the competence of the International Court in differences arising out of the interpretation and application of the Convention, the Soviet Union will, as hitherto, adhere to the position that, for the submission of a particular dispute for settlement by the International Court, the consent of all the parties to the dispute is required in every individual case. This reservation is equally applicable to the provision contained in the same section, whereby the advisory opinion of the International Court shall be accepted as decisive.

Slovakia <4>, <11>

South Africa
Reservations:
"The Government of the Republic of South Africa does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article II, Section 5 in so far as it relates to the buying, selling and holding of gold as certain limitations exist in the Republic regarding the buying, selling and holding of gold. Explanatory note: the buying, selling and holding of gold in the Republic is regulated. In terms of Exchange Control Regulation 2 no person other than an Authorised Dealer may buy or borrow any gold from, or sell to, any person not being an Authorised Dealer, unless exemption from Exchange Control Regulation 5 has been authorised (Mining Houses and Mining Producers may elect to sell their total gold holdings to the approved counter parties, including foreign counter parties, provided that the Exchange Control Department of the South African Reserve Bank has given the necessary exemption from the aforementioned regulation).
Pending a decision by the Government of the Republic of South Africa on the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, the Government of the Republic does not consider itself bound by the terms of Article VIII, Section 30 of the Convention which provides for the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in differences arising out of the interpretation or application of the Convention. The Republic will adhere to the position that, for the submission of a particular dispute for settlement by the International Court, the consent of all the parties to



> 1 2 3 ... 9 10 11 12 ... 13 14

	Поделиться:	Tweet