Partijen en gegevens

The Republic of Armenia hereby declares that the paragraph c of the Section 18 of the Convention shall not apply to the nationals of the Republic of Armenia.

…the State of Qatar has reservation on section (30) of article (8) of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, adopted by the General Assembly on 13 February 1946.

The State of Qatar does not consider itself bound by the provisions of section (30) of the aforementioned Convention which provides for the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in the case of differences arising out of the interpretation or application of the Convention, and declares that the consent of all the parties to the dispute is necessary for the submission of any particular dispute to the International Court of Justice for settlement.

Furthermore, the State of Qatar does not consider the advisory opinion given by the International Court of Justice shall be accepted as decisive as indicated in above-mentioned section (30).

The Government of New Zealand, having considered the said Convention, hereby accede thereto with the reservation that exemption from rates imposed by any law in New Zealand of taxation imposed on salaries and emoluments, by any law in New Zealand, shall not extend to a person who is a British subject and who is domiciled and employed in New Zealand.

…Canada accedes to the Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations (adopted. by the General Assembly of the United Nations on February 13, 1946) with the reservation that exemption from taxation imposed by any law in Canada on salaries and emoluments shall not extend to.a Canadian citizen residing or ordinarily resident in Canada.

The Soviet Union does not consider itself bound by the provision of Section 30 of the Convention which envisages the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court and, in regard to the competence of the International Court in differences arising out of the interpretation and application of the Convention, the Soviet Union will, as hitherto, adhere to the position that, for the submission of a particular dispute for settlement by the International Court, the consent of all the parties to the dispute is required in every individual case. This reservation is equally applicable to the provision contained in the same section, whereby the advisory opinion of˙ the International Court shall be accepted as decisive.

Her Majesty’s Government regret that they are unable to accept the above-mentioned reservation because in their view it is not of the kind which intending parties of the Convention have the right to make.

Depositary Communication:

By a communication received on 5 January 1955, the Government of Lebanon notified the Secretary-General that it objected to this reservation.

The Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic does not consider itself bound by the provision of Section 30 of the Convention which envisages the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court and, in regard to the competence of the International Court in differences arising out of the interpretation and application of the Convention, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic will, as hitherto, adhere to the position that, for the submission of a particular dispute for settlement by the International Court, the consent of all the parties to the dispute is required in every individual case. This reservation is equally applicable to the provision contained in the same section, whereby the advisory opinion of the International Court shall be accepted as decisive.

Her Majesty’s Government regret that they are unable to accept the above-mentioned reservation because in their view it is not of the kind which intending parties of the Convention have the right to make.

Her Majesty’s Government regret that they are unable to accept the above-mentioned reservation because in their view it is not of the kind which intending parties of the Convention have the right to make.

The Czechoslvak Republic does not consider itself bound by Section 30 of the Convention which envisages the compulsary jurisdiction of the International Court in differences arising out of the interpretation or application of the Convention; in regard to the competance[lees: competence] of the International Court in such differences, the Czechoslovak Republic adheres to the position that, for the submission of a particular dispute for settlement by the International Court, the consent of all the parties to the dispute is required in every individual case. This reservation is equally applicable to the further provisions contained in the same section, whereby the advisory opinion of the International Court shall be accepted as decisive.

Officials of the United Nations of Thai nationality shall not be immune on national service obligations.

The Romanian People's Republic does not consider itself bound by the terms of section 30 of the Convention which provide for the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court in differences arising out of the interpretation or application of the Convention; with respect to the competence of the International Court in such differences, the Romanian People's Republic takes the view that, for the purpose of the submission of any dispute whatsoever to the Court for a ruling, the consent of all the parties to the dispute is required in every individual case. This reservation is equally applicable to the provisions contained in the said section which stipulate that the advisory opinion of the International Court is to be accepted as decisive.

Her Majesty’s Government regret that they are unable to accept the above-mentioned reservation because in their view it is not of the kind which intending parties of the Convention have the right to make.

The Presidential Court of the Hungarian People's Republic expressly reserves its position with regard to Section 30 of the Convention, since, in its opinion, the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice can be founded only on the voluntary prior acceptance of such jurisdiction by all the parties concerned.

The People's Republic of Albania does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Section 30, which provide that any difference arising out of thee interpretation or application of the present Convention shall be brought before the International Court of Justice, whose opinion shall be accepted as decisive by the parties; with respect to the competence of the Court in disputes relating to the interpretation or application of the Convention, the People's Republic of Albania will continue to maintain, as it has heretofore, that in every individual case the agreement of all the parties to the dispute is required in order that the dispute may be laid before the International Court of Justice for a ruling.

The People's Republic of Bulgaria does not consider itself bound by the provision of Section 30 of the Convention which provides for the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, and, with respect to the competence of the International Court in the case of differences arising out of the interpretation or application of the Convention, the position of the People's Republic of Bulgaria is that, for the submission of a particular dispute to the International Court for settlement, the consent of all parties to the dispute is necessary in each case. This reservation also applies to the provision of the same section that the advisory opinion given by the International Court shall be accepted as decisive.

Her Majesty's Government wish to put on record that they are unable to accept these reservations because, in their view, they are not of the kind which intending parties to the Convention have the right to make.

…the Mongolian People's Republic does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Section 30 of the said General Convention, which provide that any difference arising out of the interpretation or application of the present Convention shall be referred to the International Court of Justice; and in such a case the position of the Mongolian People's Republic is that, for submission of a particular dispute to the International Court for settlement, the consent of all the parties to the dispute is necessary in every case. This reservation is equally applicable to the provision that the advisory opinion given by the International Court of Justice shall be accepted as decisive.

The Democratic and Popular Republic of Algeria does not consider itself bound by section 30 of the said Convention which provides for the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in the case of differences arising out of the interpretation or application of the Convention. It declares that, for the submission of a particular dispute to the International Court of Justice for settlement, the consent of all parties to the dispute is necessary in each case. This reservation also applies to the provisions of the same section that the advisory opinion given by the International Court of Justice shall be accepted as decisive.

Subject to the reservation with regard to section 18 (c) of the Convention, that United Nations officials of Nepalese nationality shall not be exempt from service obligations applicable to them pursuant to Nepalese law; and Subject to the reservation with regard to section 30 of the Convention, that any difference arising out of the interpretation or application of the Convention to which Nepal is a party, shall be referred to the International Court of Justice only with the specific agreement of His Majesty's Government of Nepal.

Her Majesty's Government wish to put on record that they are unable to accept these reservations because, in their view, they are not of the kind which intending parties to the Convention have the right to make.

The United Kingdom Government wish to put on record that they are unable to accept this reservation because, in their view, it is not of the kind which intending parties to the Convention have the right to make.

The German Democratie Republic does not consider itself bound by the provision of Section 30 of the Convention, which provides for the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, and, with regard. to the competence of the International Court of Justice for disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention, takes the view that in every single case the consent of all parties to the dispute shall be necessary to refer a particular dispute to the International Court of Justice for decision.

This reservation applies equally to the provision contained in this Section according to which the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice shall be accepted as decisive.

The Government of the People's Republic of China has reservations on section 30, article VIII, of the Convention.

The United Kingdom Government wish to put on record that they are unable to accept this reservation because, in their view, it is not of the kind which intending parties to the Convention have the right to make.

The instrument of accession deposited by the Government of Viet Nam contains a reservation relating to Article VIII, Section 30, of the Convention concerning the settlement of disputes over the interpretation or application of the Convention. The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland have consistently stated that they are unable to accept reservations in respect of Article VIII, Section 30. In their view, these are not the kind of reservations which intending parties to the Convention have the right to make.

Accordingly, the Government of the United Kingdom do not accept the reservation entered by the Government of Viet Nam against Article VIII, Section 30, of the Convention.

The Government of the Republic of Korea, having considered the said Convention, hereby accedes to the same declaring that the provisions of paragraph (c) of section 18 of Article V shall not apply with respect to Korean nationals.

The accession by the State of Bahrain to the said Convention shall in no way constitute recognition of Israel or be a cause for the establishment of any relations of any kind therewith.

The Government of Saudi Arabia is not bound by the text of Section 30 of Article VIII. On 1 February 2016 the Secretary-General received from the Government of Saudi Arabia the following clarification regarding the reservation to Article VIII, Section 30: The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Section 30 of the aforementioned Convention which provides for the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in the case of differences arising out of the interpretation or application of the Convention, and declares that the consent of the Parties to a given dispute is always necessary in order for the dispute to be referred to the [C]ourt for settlement. Furthermore, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia does not consider the advisory opinion given by the [I]nternational Court of Justice to be decisive in respect of differences that might arise between the United Nations and a Member State, as indicated in above-mentioned Section 30.

The Government of the Republic of Lithuania has made the reservation in respect of article 1 (1) (b), that the United Nations shall not be entitled to acquire land in the territory of the Republic of Lithuania, in view of the land regulations laid down by the article 47 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania.

Explanation

Article 47 of the Constitution gives an exhaustive list of subjects who have the right to ownership over land plots. The provisions of article 47 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania and other laws of the Republic of Lithuania do not entitle international intergovernmental organizations to own the plot of land.

It is important to note that the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania and other laws of the Republic of Lithuania provide the right to the subjects, international intergovernmental organizations among others, to long-term land lease which might be up to 99 years. In accordance with procedural and administrative requirements of the national legislation, international intergovernmental organizations, for the effective performance of their obligations, may conclude agreements, acquire and dispose of necessary movable and immovable property and may institute legal proceedings.

[The Government of Lithuania] would like to emphasize that this reservation has a temporary character and in light of legal reform, changes in the current legislation are feasible.

Her Majesty’s Government regret that they are unable to accept the above-mentioned reservation because in their view it is not of the kind which intending parties of the Convention have the right to make.

The exemption established in paragraph (b) of section 18 shall not apply with respect to Portuguese Nationals and Residents in the Portuguese Territory which have not acquired this quality for the purpose of the exercise of their activity.

Withdrawal of reservation to Section 18(b).

[...] article I, section 1(b):

The acquisition of immovable property by the United Nations shall be subject to the condition set forth in the Constitution of the Republic of Venezuela and to the restrictions established by the law provided for therein.

[...] articles V and VI:

Venezuela hereby states that the proviso established in section 15 of article IV of this Convention shall also apply with respect to articles V and VI ejusdem.

The Government of the Republic of South Africa does not consider itself bound by the provisions of Article II, Section 5 in so far as it relates to the buying, selling and holding of gold as certain limitations exist in the Republic regarding the buying, selling and holding of gold. Explanatory note: the buying, selling and holding of gold in the Republic is regulated. In terms of Exchange Control Regulation 2 no person other than an Authorised Dealer may buy or borrow any gold from, or sell to, any person not being an Authorised Dealer, unless exemption from Exchange Control Regulation 5 has been authorised (Mining Houses and Mining Producers may elect to sell their total gold holdings to the approved counter parties, including foreign counter parties, provided that the Exchange Control Department of the South African Reserve Bank has given the necessary exemption from the aforementioned regulation).

Pending a decision by the Government of the Republic of South Africa on the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, the Government of the Republic does not consider itself bound by the terms of Article VIII, Section 30 of the Convention which provides for the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in differences arising out of the interpretation or application of the Convention. The Republic will adhere to the position that, for the submission of a particular dispute for settlement by the International Court, the consent of all the parties to the dispute is required in every individual case. This reservation is equally applicable to the provisions contained in the said section, which stipulate that the advisory opinion of the International Court is to be accepted as decisive.