S.S. Wimbledon case

Case of the S.S. "Wimbledon", Britain et al. v. Germany, (1923) PCIJ Series A01 is a judgment of the Permanent Court of International Justice, rendered on August 17th, 1923. The case primarily dealt with issues pertaining to attributes of sovereignty, treaty obligations qua internal law, and the jurisprudence related to international canals.

Facts of the case

An English steamship, the "Wimbledon", was time-chartered by a French Company, 'Les Affréteurs réunis', which was based out of Paris. According to the terms of the charter, the vessel had taken on board at Salonica, 4,200 tons of munitions and artillery stores consigned to the Polish Naval Base at Danzig. On March 21st, 1921, "Wimbledon" arrived at the Kiel Canal, but the Director of Canal Traffic refused permission to pass through, basing his refusal upon the neutrality Orders issued by Germany in connection with the Russo-Polish war. The French Ambassador at Berlin requested the German Government to withdraw the prohibition and to allow S.S. "Wimbledon" to pass through the Kiel Canal in conformity with Article 380 of the Treaty of Versailles. The German Government replied that it would not allow a vessel which has on board a cargo of munitions and artillery stores consigned to the Polish Military Mission at Danzig, to pass through the canal, because the German Neutrality Orders, prohibited the transit of cargoes of this kind destined for Poland or Russia, and Article 380 of the Treaty of Versailles was not an obstacle to the application of these Orders to the Kiel Canal. The "Société des Affréteurs réunis" telegraphed to the captain of the S.S. "Wimbledon" ordering him to continue his voyage by the Danish Straits. The vessel weighed anchor on April 1st and, proceeding by Skagen, reached Danzig, its port of destination on April 6th; it had been detained for eleven days, to which must be added two days for deviation.

The hearing

The British, French, Italian and Japanese governments brought the action that was heard from January 16, 1923, to August 17, 1923.

The Court consisted of:

• Bernard Loder, President
• Charles André Weiss, Vice-President
• Robert Finlay, 1st Viscount Finlay
• Didrik Nyholm
• John Bassett Moore
• Antonio Sánchez de Bustamante y Sirven
• Rafael Altamira y Crevea
• Yorozu Oda
• Dionisio Anzilotti
• Max Huber
• Wang Ch'ung-hui (Deputy-Judge)
• Schuking (National Judge)

In reaching its decision the court considered Articles 380 to 386 of the Treaty of Versailles and Articles 2 and 7 of the Hague Convention of 1907 .

Finding

The Court first of all had to consider Poland’s application to intervene which the court allowed.

The Court then considered the substantive issue in the case and found that Germany was perfectly free to regulate her neutrality in the Russo-Polish war but the court found that the Canal had ceased to be an internal navigable waterway of Germany. The Court found Germany had a definite duty of allowing the passage of the “Wimbledon” through the Kiel Canal, and her neutrality did not oblige her to prohibit passage.

Judges Anzilotti, Huber, and Schuking, dissented.