Termination of the operation of treaties

• May result from the external or internal grounds

• General rule for internal grounds (Art 54):- in the conformity with the provisions of the

treaty- at any time by consent of all parties after

consultation with other parties• External grounds: material breach, supervining

impossibility, fundamental change of cirmcumstances

1) Material breach• General rule is that a right to terminate does

not arise unless the breach is a material (serious) one

• Art 60(3) defines “material breach”- Repudiation of the treaty not sanctioned by

the present Convention- The violation of a provision essential to the

accomplishment of the object and purpose of the treaty

• Bilateral treaty – injured party enables to terminate and suspend the treaty at its discretion, claiming compensation instead of or in addition to

• Multilateral treaty – enables all parties by unanimous decision to terminate the treaty or to terminate it for the defaulting State only

• Case: Nambia case & The Gabcikovo Nagymaros case

2) Supervining impossibility of performance

• Well established and uncontested• Art 61 of Vienna Convention limits this ground

– “permanent disappearance or destruction of an object indispensable for the execution of the treaty”

• Cannot be invoked by a party that was itself instrumental in causing these circumstances

Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project case

• Hungary and Czechoslovakia – treaty in 1977 to facilitate the construction of dams on the Danuba River

• H suspended works, arguing that to establish a joint economic investment , the treaty was inconsistent with environmental consideration

• C carried out unilateral measures in response to H’s failure to perform the treaty

• Hungary – claimed right to terminate under Art 61• Held: since H didn’t carry out most of works for which it

was responsible, the impossibility resulted from H’s own breach of an obligation flowing from treaty. Referring to Art 61 (2), the termination was invalid

Fundamental change of circumstances (rebus sic stantibus)

• Legal basis for such rule on the basis of the doctrine - coventio omnis intelligitur rebus sic stantibus: all treaties are concluded subject to an implied condition rebus sic stantibus (things remaining as they are)

• According to modern IL, this rule applies only in the most exceptional circumstances; otherwise it could be used as an excuse to evade all sorts of inconvenient treaty obligations

• Art 62 confines the rule within narrow limits. FCOC may with certain strict limits, entitles a party to invoke the change as ground for terminating, withdrawing

• It may not invoke to a treaty establishing a “boundary”• A State may not invoke art 62 if the change was caused

by a breach of its own international obligations – either treaty in question or international agreement

• Cases: The Fisheries Jurisdiction case & Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project case