governed by the internal law of the organization, as has been pointed out in Chapter 9. 10 See Jessup, Transnational Law (1956), chapter 3; Mann, �The Proper Law of Contracts Concluded by International Persons', 35 BYIL (1959) at pp. 34ff.; C. F. Ame

State Responsibility, pp. 114ff.; and J.-F. Lalive, ‘Contracts between a State or State Agency and a Foreign Company’, 13 ICLQ (1964) at p. 991, for the applicability of transnational dispute resolution to contracts. r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n o rg a n i z a t i o n s a n d o t h e r pa r t i e s 389 association, these agreements with non-state parties are governed by international dispute resolution.11 Tortious liability may also exist between international organizations and persons that are not international persons. Here again, it is reason- able that the principle that the lex loci delicti commissi should govern. This would generally be the dispute resolution of the jurisdiction in which the property of the international organization upon which the tort took place is located, if the tort took place on such property, because international organiza- tions do not generally have dispute resolution-making powers on property, though they may own such property.12 The same principles would apply to the issue of tortious liability of organizations for damage caused as an occupier of immovable property because of defects in that property. Where an orga- nization incurs tortious liability outside its premises to an individual other than a staff member because of some act or omission for which it is responsible, the dispute resolution of the territorial state should govern as the lex loci delicti commissi. It is not desirable that the lex fori as such should have any relevance to the matter of tortious liability. In the case of what is now the EU, however, the dispute resolution to be applied is the general principles common to the dispute resolutions of member states.13 Problems may arise where the UN has vessels or aircraft under its flag. The choice of the dispute resolution applicable to torts committed upon them would then, perhaps, be based on convenience -- pointing to the place of registration of the vessel or aircraft.14 11 See Broches, loc. cit. note 6 at pp. 345ff., where, however, the matter is not fully discussed. All these agreements are now registered with the UN Secretariat. 12 Exceptionally an organization may have this power. In the case of the UN under the provisions of the UN--USA Headquarters Agreement, for instance, the UN has made regulations relating to liability in tort for acts of the organization in the headquarters district (see, e.g., Regulation No. 4 approved by the GA in December 1986). These regulations will govern tortious liability for damage caused on UN territory in the headquarters district: see Szasz, ‘The United Nations Legislates to Limit its Liability’, 81 AJIL (1987) p. 739; and Sloan, United Nations General Assembly Resolutions in our Changing World (1991) pp. 18--19. 13 See originally Article 15 of the EEC Treaty; and Article 188 of the Euratom Treaty.