Western Front, Aerial Bombardment and Related Claims, Partial Award—Eritrea’s Claims
Eritrea Ethiopia Claims Commission, 2005
Rel. No. 8641 / December 2, 2005 (Securities Act of 1933), Rel. No. 52875 / December 2, 2005 (Securities Exchange Act of 1934) Securities and Exchange Commission, Washington, D.C. (2005)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Ethiopia bombed a large power station in Eritrea, causing significant damage. The power station was not yet fully operational at the time of the bombing. However, construction was substantially completed, and the station had been able to supply power to nearby areas, including a naval base and port, as part of a testing phase. The power station was to transmit power throughout Eritrea once fully operational. Eritrea brought a claim before an international arbitral commission, alleging that the bombing of the power station was unlawful, because the station was not a legitimate military objective. At trial, a witness for Eritrea conceded that the station “was going to be a major asset” for the country, because the plant being used to supply power to the area at the time was “on its last legs.”
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
Dissent (Van Houtte)
What to do next…
Here's why 820,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 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.
