Lotus case judgment (P.C.I.J. Series A No. 10)

E851646

Lotus case judgment (P.C.I.J. Series A No. 10) is a landmark 1927 decision of the Permanent Court of International Justice that addressed the scope of state jurisdiction in international law following a collision on the high seas.

All labels observed (6)

How this entity was disambiguated

Statements (48)

Predicate Object
instanceOf decision of the Permanent Court of International Justice
international court judgment
landmark case in international law
alsoKnownAs S.S. Lotus case judgment
The Lotus case
applicantState France
areaOfLaw jurisdiction in international law
law of the sea
public international law
bindingOn parties to the dispute (France and Turkey)
citation P.C.I.J. Series A, No. 10
consequence criminal prosecution of French officer Lieutenant Demons in Turkey
considered landmark decision of the Permanent Court of International Justice
leading case on state jurisdiction in international law
court Permanent Court of International Justice
decisionDate 1927-09-07
disputeBetween France
Turkey
factPattern collision caused deaths of Turkish nationals
frequentlyCitedIn cases and literature on extraterritorial jurisdiction
textbooks on public international law
holding Turkey did not act in conflict with international law by instituting criminal proceedings against the French officer
influenced development of the permissive view of state jurisdiction in international law
later debates on jurisdiction in the law of the sea
scholarly concept of the "Lotus principle"
keyIssue whether Turkey could exercise criminal jurisdiction over a French officer following a collision on the high seas
languageOfJudgment French
legalQuestion whether exclusive jurisdiction belonged to the flag state of the vessel on the high seas
originatingIncident collision between French steamship Lotus and Turkish collier Boz-Kourt
originatingIncidentLocation high seas
partyState French Republic
Republic of Turkey
linked to: Turkey
placeOfCourt The Hague
principleArticulated absence of a prohibitive rule does not equal prohibition in international law
international law leaves to states a wide measure of discretion in asserting jurisdiction
states may exercise jurisdiction unless there is a prohibitive rule of international law
relatedVessel Boz-Kourt
S.S. Lotus
respondentState Turkey
result claims of France rejected
seriesNumber Series A No. 10
linked to: Series A
status final judgment
subjectMatter jurisdiction over incidents on the high seas
permissive nature of international law regarding state jurisdiction
scope of state criminal jurisdiction in international law
successorBody International Court of Justice (as successor to the PCIJ, not to the specific case)
temporalContext interwar period
yearDecided 1927

How these facts were elicited

Referenced by (7)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Publications of the Permanent Court of International Justice, Series A, No. 10 contains judgment of the Permanent Court of International Justice in the Lotus case
linked to: Lotus case judgment (P.C.I.J. Series A No. 10)
S.S. Boz-Kourt legalCase The Lotus Case
linked to: Lotus case judgment (P.C.I.J. Series A No. 10)
S.S. Boz-Kourt victimShipInCase The Lotus Case
linked to: Lotus case judgment (P.C.I.J. Series A No. 10)
Lotus principle articulatedIn Judgment of the Permanent Court of International Justice in S.S. Lotus (1927)
linked to: Lotus case judgment (P.C.I.J. Series A No. 10)
Lotus case judgment (P.C.I.J. Series A No. 10) alsoKnownAs S.S. Lotus case judgment
linked to: Lotus case judgment (P.C.I.J. Series A No. 10)
Lotus case judgment (P.C.I.J. Series A No. 10) alsoKnownAs The Lotus case
linked to: Lotus case judgment (P.C.I.J. Series A No. 10)