## Facts

- Pan Am Flight 103 was destroyed over Lockerbie, Scotland on December 21, 1988, killing 259 people aboard and 11 on the ground.
- In November 1991, a U.S. grand jury indicted two Libyan nationals for placing a bomb on the aircraft.
- The United States (with the United Kingdom) demanded Libya surrender the suspects for trial; Libya refused and asserted the 1971 Montreal Convention governed and required prosecution in Libya if extradition was not provided.
- On March 3, 1992, Libya instituted proceedings against the United States, invoking dispute-settlement jurisdiction under Article 14(1) of the Montreal Convention and Article 36(1) of the ICJ Statute.
- Libya requested provisional measures to restrain U.S. actions alleged to coerce surrender of the suspects and to prevent prejudice to Libya’s claimed treaty rights pending judgment.
- The U.N. Security Council first urged cooperation (Resolution 731 (1992)), then adopted Resolution 748 (1992) under Chapter VII requiring Libyan compliance with the requests and imposing mandatory sanctions.
- On April 14, 1992, the ICJ declined to indicate the requested provisional measures by 11 votes to 5.

## Issues

1. Whether the circumstances required provisional measures under Article 41 of the ICJ Statute to preserve Libya’s asserted rights under the Montreal Convention pending the merits.
2. Whether, at the provisional-measures stage, binding Security Council obligations under the U.N. Charter (including Resolution 748 (1992)) constrained the Court from ordering measures inconsistent with those obligations.

## Decision

- The Court declined to indicate provisional measures, concluding the circumstances did not require exercise of its Article 41 power.
- The Court proceeded on the basis of prima facie jurisdiction sufficient to consider provisional measures, without deciding jurisdiction definitively or reaching the merits.
- The Court treated the parties’ U.N. Charter obligations, including Security Council Resolution 748 (1992), as prevailing over potentially conflicting treaty-based claims for purposes of assessing provisional relief.
- The Court stated the denial of provisional measures did not pre-judge jurisdiction, admissibility, or the merits.

## Legal Principles

- Provisional measures under Article 41 are exceptional and require necessity to preserve rights, urgency, and a risk of irreparable prejudice before final judgment.
- At the provisional-measures stage, the Court may consider whether there is prima facie jurisdiction based on the invoked compromissory clause, without deciding the merits of the underlying treaty dispute.
- Under Article 103 of the U.N. Charter, Charter obligations prevail over conflicting obligations under other international agreements.
- Where a Security Council decision adopted under Chapter VII imposes binding duties, the Court will avoid indicating provisional measures that would impede compliance with those duties.

## Conclusion

The ICJ denied Libya’s request for provisional measures because the Article 41 conditions were not met in the circumstances and because binding Security Council obligations under the U.N. Charter—especially Resolution 748 (1992)—took precedence at this interim stage over Libya’s asserted Montreal Convention rights.


Questions of Interpretation & Application of the 1971 Montreal Convention Arising from the Aerial Incident at Lockerbie (Libya v. United States), 1992 I.C.J. 114 (Order of Apr. 14)