Gabčíkovo -Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia)
International Court of Justice
1997 I.C.J. 7
In 1977, Hungary and Czechoslovakia entered into a treaty to build and operate various structures (a reservoir, dam, bypass canal, hydroelectric power plants, and navigational and flood control improvements) on the Danube River, their shared border. Construction began in 1978 but was not completed. In 1989, both countries experienced major political and economic changes. New political leadership in both countries expressed concerns over going through with the projects for environmental and economic reasons. Hungary first suspended its share of the project in 1989 and later abandoned it. Czechoslovakia began work in 1991 on a new version of the plan. However, in 1993, Czechoslovakia dissolved into two states, and Slovakia became independent. Hungary and Slovakia submitted a dispute to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and requested the court to determine on the basis of international law whether Hungary was entitled to suspend and then abandon its part of the Danube project. Hungary argued it was entitled to suspend and abandon due to changed circumstances and impossibility of performance.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 166,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.