Thailand Law Forum Thailand Law Forum  
 
Feature Articles :

History of Cannabis
  and Anti-Marijuana
  Laws in Thailand



Thailand’s Notable
  Criminal Extradition
  Cases


Guide for Tourists
  to Laws in Thailand



Neither Free nor Fair:
  Burma’s Sham Elections



Sex Laws in Thailand:
  Part 1



Renewable Energy
  in Thailand



Transsexuals and
  Thai Law



Foreign Mafia in
  Thailand

Thailand Lawyer Blog:
 Courts Order Thai
  Military to Cease
  Labeling Transsexuals
  as Mentally Ill
 Work Permit Law
  Changes in Thailand
 Bahamian Supreme Court
  Ruling Backs
  Prenuptial Agreement
 The US FATCA:
  “The Neutron Bomb
  the Global Financial
  System”?
 The Effects of the US
  Government’s Policies
  on Americans Living
  Abroad
 Chinese Assimilation
  in Thailand vs. Malaysia
 Illegal Wildlife
  Trafficking in Asia:
  Thailand as a Hub?
 Rabbi Enforcing
  Jewish Divorce Order
  Arrested by FBI
 U.S. Prenuptial
  Agreements in Thailand:
  Why Thai Law is
  Important
 US Immigration in
  Decline?
 Abortion and Family
  Planning Law in
  the Philippines
 U.S. Courts and the
  Application of Foreign
  Law to International
  Prenuptial Agreements
 Thailand Blasted by 2011
  Human Trafficking Report
 US Expats on Alert:
  New US Tax Law
  Extends IRS’s Reach
  Internationally
 Hangover 2 and
  the Thai Censors
 Thailand’s Film
  Industry Steps Up

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

JUDGMENT OF 15 JUNE 1962
CASE CONCERNING THE TEMPLE OF PREAH VIHEAR
(CAMBODIA VS. THAILAND)

Present: President WINIARSKI; Vice-President ALFARO; Judges BASDEVANT, BADAWI, MORENO QUINTANA, WELLINGTON KOO, Sir Percy SPENDER, Sir Gerald FITZMAURICE, KORETSKY, TANAKA, BUSTAMANTE Y RIVERO, MORELLI; Registrar GARNIER-COIGNET.

In the case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear,
between
the Kingdom of Cambodia,

represented by
H.E. Truong Cang, Member of the Haut Conseil du Trône,
as Agent,
and by
H.E. Ouk Chhoum, Minister Counsellor at the Cambodian Embassy in France,
assisted by
Hon. Dean Acheson, Member of the Bar of the Supreme Court of the United States of America,
M. Roger Pinto, Professor at the Paris Law Faculty,
M. Paul Reuter, Professor at the Paris Law Faculty,
as Counsel,
and by
Mr. Brice M. Clagett, Member of the Bar of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia,
as Legal Adviser,
Colonel Ngin Karet, Director of the Survey Department of the Royal Khmer Armed Forces,
as Expert Adviser,
M. Chan Youran,
as General Secretary of the Delegation,
M. Chem Snguon,
as Deputy General Secretary of the Delegation,
and
the Kingdom of Thailand,
represented by
H.S.H. Prince Vongsamahip Jayankura, Ambassador of Thailand to the Netherlands,
as Agent,
assisted by
Mr. Seni Pramoj, Member of the Thai Bar,
M. Henri Rolin,
Honorary Professor of the Free University of Brussels, Advocate at the Court of Appeal of Brussels,
The Rt. Hon. Sir Frank Soskice, Q.C., M.P., former Attorney- General of England,
Mr. James Nevins Hyde, Member of the Bar of the State of York and Member of the Bar of the Supreme Court of the United States of America,
M. Marcel Slusny, Advocate at the Court of Appeal of Brussels,
Lecturer at the Free University of Brussels,
Mr. J. G. Le Quesne, Member of the English Bar,
as Advocates and Counsel,
and by
Lieutenant-General Busrindre Bhakdikul, Director-General, Royal Thai Survey Department, Ministry of Defence,
Mr. Suk Perunavin, Deputy Under-Secretary in the Office of the Prime Minister,
Mr. Chinda Na Songkhla, Deputy Secretary-General of the Civil Service Commission,
Lieutenant-colonel Phoon Phon Asanachinta, Lecturer, School of Surveying, Royal Thai Survey Department, Ministry of Defence,
as Expert Advisers,
and by
Mr. Chapikorn Sreshthaputra, Chief of the Legal Division, Treaty and Legal Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
Mr. David S. Downs, Solicitor, Supreme Court of Judicature, England,
as Juridical Advisers,
The Court, composed as above,
delivers the following Judgment:
By its Judgment of 26 May 1961, the Court rejected the first preliminary objection of the Government of Thailand and found that it had jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the dispute submitted to it on 6 October 1959 by the Application of the Government of Cambodia.
By Order of the same date, the Court fixed the time-limits for the further pleadings. The case became ready for hearing on the filing of the last pleading on 2 February 1962.
Public hearings were held on the following dates: 1-3 March, 5 March, 7-10 March, 12-13 March, 15-17 March, 19-24 March and 26-31 March 1962. At these hearings the Court heard oral arguments and replies by M. Truong Cang, Mr. Dean Acheson, M. Roger Pinto and M. Paul Reuter on behalf of the Government of Cambodia, and by Prince Vongsamahip Jayankura, Mr. Seni Pramoj, M. Henri Rolin, Sir Frank Soskice and Mr. James Nevins Hyde on behalf of the Government of Thailand.
At the hearings from 15 to 20 March 1962', the Court heard the evidence of the witnesses and experts, called by each of the Parties, in reply to questions put to them in examination and cross-examination on behalf of the Parties and by Members of the Court. The following persons gave evidence:

Part 2

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
     

Chaninat & Leeds offered support in translating Supreme Court case law. Chaninat & Leeds is a Thailand Law Firm practicing family and business law. Chaninat & Leeds specializes in Thailand criminal Lawyer. Chaninat & Leeds is managed by an American attorney Thailand. For any submissions, comments, or questions, e-mail the Thailand Law Forum at: info@thailawforum.com Please read our Disclaimer.

 

© Copyright Thailand Law Forum, All Rights Reserved
(except where the work is the individual works of the authors as noted)