IRAN-UNITED STATES CLAIMS TRIBUNAL
SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE ROSEMARY BARKETT
CONCURRING IN PART, DISSENTING IN PART
1. I concur with the results reached by the Tribunal Majority (the "Majority") except as discussed herein.
STATE RESPONSIBILITY AND DAMAGES IN CLAIM G-18 (STRADIVARIUS VIOLIN (THE "VIOLIN") HELD BY MR. ALI FOROUGH)
2. As the Majority recognizes, there are two fundamental questions to be answered in each of the Claims in this case: whether the property at issue falls within the provisions of Paragraph 9, triggering a U.S. obligation, and, if so, whether the United States breached such obligation.
3. Regarding the first question, the Majority correctly concludes that the meaning of "Iranian properties" in Paragraph 9 of the General Declaration of the Algiers Accords (the "Accords") is governed by Partial Award 529, which held that the term "Iranian properties" encompasses only tangible properties solely owned by Iran and does not include properties in which Iran has only a partial or contingent interest. Moreover, as the Majority explains, whether Iran owns property is determined by whether Iran holds title to that property according to the law of the jurisdiction where the property is located, the lex situs.
4. However, because the Majority fails to apply the principles it has correctly articulated, it erroneously finds State responsibility in Claim G-18--the only Claim before us in which a possessor claims an ownership interest.