The 3rd Chamber of the Court of Appeal of Versailles
The original court case (Case No: 10/02629) was held at the Tribunal de Grande Instance de Nanterre (Nanterre District Court) in France based on initial action was filed by AFPS in February 2007.
The Versailles Court of Appeal's ruling on the provisions of the judgment of April 15, 2009, was reversed in a judgement issued on March 22, 2013.
This High Court of Appeals judgement was a rejection of the claims previously brought by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Association France-Palestine Solidarité (AFPS) against the companies Alstom, Alstom Transport, and Veolia Transport.
The Court's Rulings on the PLO's Case reversed the initial lower court decision, that declared the PLO's voluntary intervention admissible as it recognized that the PLO and therefore had the standing and a legitimate interest to act in the case.
The Versailles Court of Appeal declared the PLO is inadmissible in its claim and it's claims were ultimately rejected:
The Court confirmed the rejection of the central argument of the PLO and AFPS was that the contracts were illegal because they violated international law, specifically the Geneva and Hague Conventions, by participating in the construction of the tramway in the West Bank/East Jerusalem.
The Court's reason for rejecting this claim was that the international law provisions invoked by the PLO create obligations for States (like an "Occupying Power"), not for private companies like Alstom and Veolia.
The private companies are not considered subjects of international law in this context and therefore cannot be held directly liable for a breach of these international treaties
In summary, the Hight Court of appeals ruled that the PLO had the right to bring the action, but it ultimately failed to prove its case on the merits, as the Court found that the international law articles cited did not apply.
The French Court ruling over the previous decision found that Israel’s presence in Judea and Samaria is unequivocally legal under international law, dismissing a suit brought by the Palestinian Authority (PA) against Jerusalem’s light rail built by French companies Alstom and Veolia
To rule on the suit, the Court of Appeals had to determine the legal rights of Palestinians and Israelis in the region.
Their conclusion was that the Palestinians have no right – in the international legal sense – to the region, unlike Israel, who is legitimately entitled to all land beyond the 1949 ceasefire lines to the Jordan River 1967 Ceasefire line and now 1995 Jordanian- Israeli negotiated peace border.
The Court explained that the PA misinterpreted the texts and they do not apply to Israel presence in Judea and Samaria.
All the international instruments put forward by the PLO were acts signed between states, and the obligations or prohibitions contained therein are relevant to states. Neither the PA nor the PLO are states, and therefore, none of these legal documents apply to them.
Likewise, the Court showed that these texts are binding only on those who signed them, namely the contracting parties. Neither the PLO nor the PA have ever signed these texts.
The Court, quite irritated by the arguments presented by the PA, boldly asserted that the law cannot be based solely on the PLO’s assessment of a political or social situation.
The Court of Appeal therefore sentenced the PLO and Association France Palestine Solidarité (AFPS), who was co-appellant, to pay 30,000 euros ($32,000) to Alstom, 30,000 euros to Alstom Transport and 30,000 euros to Veolia Transport.
Neither the PLO nor the Palestinian Authority nor the AFPS appealed to the Supreme Court, and therefore the judgment became final.
This was the first time that a NON ISRAELI Court has legally destroyed all Palestinian legal claim that Israel’s occupation is illegal.
To rule on the suit, the Court of Appeals had to determine the legal rights of Palestinians and Israelis in the region.
Their conclusion was that the Palestinians have no right – in the international legal sense – to the region, unlike Israel, who is legitimately entitled to all land beyond the 1949 ceasefire lines to the Jordan River 1967 Ceasefire line and now 1995 Jordanian- Israeli negotiated peace border.
The Court explained that the PA misinterpreted the texts and they do not apply to Israel presence in Judea and Samaria.
All the international instruments put forward by the PLO were acts signed between states, and the obligations or prohibitions contained therein are relevant to states. Neither the PA nor the PLO are states, and therefore, none of these legal documents apply to them.
Likewise, the Court showed that these texts are binding only on those who signed them, namely the contracting parties. Neither the PLO nor the PA have ever signed these texts.
The Court, quite irritated by the arguments presented by the PA, boldly asserted that the law cannot be based solely on the PLO’s assessment of a political or social situation.
The Court of Appeal therefore sentenced the PLO and Association France Palestine Solidarité (AFPS), who was co-appellant, to pay 30,000 euros ($32,000) to Alstom, 30,000 euros to Alstom Transport and 30,000 euros to Veolia Transport.
Neither the PLO nor the Palestinian Authority nor the AFPS appealed to the Supreme Court, and therefore the judgment became final.
This was the first time that a NON ISRAELI Court has legally destroyed all Palestinian legal claim that Israel’s occupation is illegal.
No comments:
Post a Comment