Free_Law_Journal-Vol.. - Free World Publishing Inc.

FREE LAW JOURNAL - VOLUME 1, NUMBER 1 (18 JULY 2005)
Earlier to that, in October, 1944 North Corfu Channel was swept by the British Navy. However, no mines
were found in that mine sweeping operation and thus the Channel was announced as a safe route of
navigation. In January and February, 1945 the Channel was again swept by the British Navy and even this
time existence of any mine was absent in the Channel. As a result, the British Admiralty must have
considered the Channel to be a safe route for navigation, which is shown by the fact that on May 15th
1946, it sent two British Cruisers and on October 22nd a squadron through the Channel without any
special measures of precaution against danger from moored mines 1 . Nevertheless, in the later case the
explosion was occurred where life of human and property were damaged.
Finally, on the 13th of November, 1946, North Corfu Channel was swept by British minesweepers and
twenty-two moored mines were cut. Two of the mines were taken to Malta for an expert examination and
it was found that the mines were belonging to German GY type.
United Kingdom claimed Albania to incur responsibility and pay compensation under international law
for the explosion occurred in its territorial water where death and injuries of 44, and personal injuries to
42, British officers and men were held. The UK also claimed compensation for the damages of his
majesty's ships.
The Issues of Contentious
When the case was in its hearing before the Court, various factual as well as legal issues were appeared.
However, parties to the case did bind themselves by special agreement to some particular issues to be
decided by the Court. Therefore, the first question of contentious before the Court was, whether Albania is
responsible under international law for the explosions which occurred on the 22nd October 1946 in
Albanian waters, and for the damages and loss of human life which resulted from them, and is there any
duty to pay compensation. 2 Different factual issues arose from this point at the time of hearing such as
when was the minefield laid down; was the explosions on the 22nd October occurred from the floating
mines; was really Albanian government ignorant of the mine laying activities and so on.
The Government of the United Kingdom claimed that the minefield was laid recently, and the explosions
occurred on 22 October was from the same minefield discovered on 13 November. The government of
Albania, however, acknowledged that the minefield was recently laid but contended that it must have been
laid after October 22nd, 1946. About the explosions of 22nd October, Albanian argument was that, it
occurred from the floating mines, coming from the old minefield in vicinity, or magnetic ground mines,
magnetic moored mines, or German GR mines 3 . However it was established before the Court by expert
examination that the explosions were occurred neither from the floating mines nor from the magnetic
moored mines or from German GR mines.
About the mine laying activities, and/or knowledge of such activities on part of Albania, it’s argument
was that Albania does not have any navy and it has only few launches and motor boats with which main
laying activities was impossible. Albania also denied its knowledge about the existence of minefield.
Interestingly on part of the United Kingdom little attempt was made by the government that Albania
herself laid the mines. Rather, it called upon Albanian government to disclose the circumstances in which
1 ICJ Report, 1949 at p. 14
2 ICJ Report, 1949 at p. 12
3 Id. at p.14
KAMRUL HOSSAIN - LEGAL ISSUES ARISING OUT OF CORFU CHANNEL CASE OF 1949 46