‍This article looks at three important moments in the evolution of international humanitarian legal instruments and considers their combined effect on the contemporary law of reparations for individual claimants. It examines the drafting and future interpretation or application of Art 3 of the Hague Convention, Art 51 of Geneva Convention I (and the parallel articles in the other three Geneva Conventions) and Art 91 of Protocol I (1977) to the Geneva Conventions. It shows how the meaning and ultimately the impact of potentially very incisive Articles can be weakened, confused or otherwise avoided under the influence of individual States with specific agendas at crucial moments in the drafting process. It concludes with a brief review of the workings of the UN Compensation Commission (see our instruments page) and sees in in them an attempt to honour the spirit of Article 3 of the Hague Convention while avoiding its operational drawbacks and at the same time avoiding the obvious injustice of the simpler mechanism of lump-sum agreements.