Corfu Channel Case (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v.

Albania)

FACTS
On May 15, 1946, two British ships passed through Albanias North Corfu Channel where Albanians fired
at them. This led to diplomatic discussions about the right of British ships to pass peacefully through
Albanian waters. Albanians contented that the ships shall not pass through without providing prior
notification to the Albanian government. However, UK argued that under international law it has a right to
innocently pass through the straits. After this incident (between 15th May, 1946 and 22nd October, 1946), the
Albanian government placed mines in the Corfu Channel. Albania was at war with Greece, and the mines
were supposed to be a part of its defense. On the 22 nd October the British again attempted to pass through
the straits, and de-mined the channel, which led to a loss of human life. UK claimed that the ships were
involved in an innocent passage. Albania claimed that sending warships through the channel was meant to
be intimidating and thus not innocent.

ISSUE
The UK brought a suit in the ICJ on the ground that Albania had a duty to warn the approaching British
ships of the mines. It sought damages from Albania. Albania argued that the British ships had violated its
territorial rights on May 15, 1946, and that it was entitled to a satisfaction.

STATUTE APPLICABLE
Articles 17-21 of the Convention - Rules of innocent passage.
Article 39 of the Convention - Rules of transit passage.

REASONING

The ICJ found that ships could use narrow channels for innocent passage, even if that meant they had to
enter the 12-mile territorial waters of a coastal country. The ICJ found that the UK had a right to traverse
the Channel. The ICJ found that since the Channel could be used to innocent passage, Albania could not
mine it without giving prior notice.

The ICJ also said that UK couldnt sweep the Channel for mines, since minesweeping was outside the
definition of innocent passage. The Court recognized that the Albanian Government completely failed to
carry out its duties after the explosions, and the dilatory nature of its diplomatic notes, were extenuating
circumstances for the action of the United Kingdom Government.

This case mainly decided based on customary international law, as it occurred prior to the Convention on
the Law of the Sea [1833 U.N.T.S. 3 (1982)], which would now apply.

DISPOSITION
To ensure respect for international law, of which it is the organ, the Court declared that the action of the
British Navy constituted a violation of Albanian sovereignty.