SS Lotus (France v. Turkey) [1927]

PCIJ Rep Series A No 10 · Permanent Court of International Justice · International

Public International Lawpublic-international-lawPublic International LawJurisdiction – Customary International Law – Sources

Issue

Whether Turkey had jurisdiction to prosecute the French officer absent a treaty allowing it.

Held

Turkey did not violate international law; states have wide discretion to prescribe jurisdiction unless a prohibitive rule exists.

Exam use

Summary

Whether Turkey had jurisdiction to prosecute the French officer absent a treaty allowing it.

Facts

Issue

Whether Turkey had jurisdiction to prosecute the French officer absent a treaty allowing it.

Held

Turkey did not violate international law; states have wide discretion to prescribe jurisdiction unless a prohibitive rule exists.

Ratio Decidendi

States may exercise jurisdiction over acts occurring outside their territory unless prohibited by a rule of international law; on the high seas, concurrent jurisdiction exists absent treaty.

Reasoning

Essay-Ready Explanation Generator

Version 1 of 4

Reference to SS Lotus (France v. Turkey) (PCIJ Rep Series A No 10) strengthens a Public International Law answer because the case reflects the principle that States may exercise jurisdiction over acts occurring outside their territory unless prohibited by a rule of international law; on the high seas, concurrent jurisdiction exists absent treaty. Applied to a problem question, the case should be used after identifying the issue as Whether Turkey had jurisdiction to prosecute the French officer absent a treaty allowing it. The stronger essay move is to connect the material facts to the court's holding, then explain whether the present facts support the same conclusion or justify distinguishing the authority.

Underlying Concepts

  • public-international-law
  • Public International Law
  • Jurisdiction – Customary International Law – Sources
  • case authority
  • exam application

Significance

Related Cases

No related cases listed.

Exam Tips

Revision Checklist

  • Name the issue before discussing facts so the marker sees the legal question immediately.
  • State the holding in one sentence, then use the ratio to explain why the court reached that result.
  • Use the citation and jurisdiction to show why this authority matters for the problem you are answering.
  • Pair this case with one supporting or contrasting authority if the question tests limits, policy, or exceptions.