Views diverge regarding the validity of territorial confiscations. This is apparent from the case law which in this respect has come into existence. The question of validity may appear in different ways. Most frequent is the following case. The confiscating state, or its assignee, exports the confiscated goods and an action for recovery is brought before a foreign court either against the confiscating state, where the latter still claims a title to property, or against its assignee, where the goods have already been alienated1. It is evident that in such cases the courts are asked to give different decisions from those in matters of extra-territorial confiscation. In adjudging a territorial confiscation to be valid, the courts will play a more passive part, than in a case where they validate an extra-territorial confiscation. In the latter case their part would be an active one since they would aid in the execution of a foreign confiscatory measure. On the one hand the question is whether “the validity or legality of what that foreign government has done may be examined and possibly invalidated and set aside. This situation, as may be noticed, deals with what is a fait accompli.