Qatar v. Bahrain case brief summary

Qatar v. Bahrain

Argument:

Exchanges and “minutes” signed by heads of state do not constitute an agreement such that ICJ jur under 36(1) is founded, but rather a simple record of negotiations

• The Foreign minister could not have signed a treaty because he lacked the authority under the Constitution of Bahrain—Counter= yet, he APPEARED to have the authority which is sufficient under ARTICLE 7, paragraph 1 and 2

Held: Yes, they constitute an agreement

Analysis:

• No particular form is necessary
• Subsequent conduct is irrelevant

TEST:

• Actual terms and the circumstances under which it was drawn up
• Intentions of the people signing the minutes are irrelevant
• Subsequent conduct is also irrelevant