Jurisdiction of the Courts of Danzing Advisory Opinion

According to art 104 of treaty of Versailles ‘a treaty …shall come into force between Polish government and Free City of Danzing, with the object’ in particular ‘to ensure to Poland the control and administrations of the whole railway system within the city’ this convention was concluded in Paris 1920. Under that convention in 1921 the ‘definitive agreement in regard to officials DARO’ was signed. Subsequently Danzing railway officials, based on the DARO, brought actions before the court of Danzing against the Administration for pecuniary claims. The courts declared to be competent and adjudge against Poland. Poland denied complying because the Courts of Danzing were not competent. Danzing recurred to the LN, the council asked for an advisory opinion.

According to a well-established principle of international law, the DARO (Beamtenabkommen) being an international agreement, cannot, as such, create direct rights and obligations for private individuals. But it cannot be dispute that the very object of an international agreement, according to the intention of the contracting parties, may be the adoption by the parties of some definitive rules creating individual rights and obligations and enforceable by the national courts. That there is such an intention in the present case can be established by reference to the terms of the DARO… the intention of the parties, which is to be ascertained from the contents of the Agreement, taking into consideration the manner in which the Agreement has been applied, is decisive. The Court in the present case should apply this principle of interpretation.