註：根據以上給「割讓」在字典上的定義，沒有嚴格要求指定 "收受國" 來完成割讓行為。

在領土割讓而沒有規定 "收受國" 的情況下，可以簡單地稱之為 "懸空割讓"。

1. In the April 11, 1899, Treaty of Paris (aka Spanish - American Peace Treaty), Cuba was a "limbo cession."
1. 在 1899 年 04 月 11 日的《巴黎條約》（又名西班牙-美國和平條約）中，古巴處於 "懸空割讓" 狀態。

2. In the April 28, 1952, San Francisco Peace Treaty (SFPT), Taiwan was a "limbo cession."
2. 在 1952 年 04 月 28 日的舊金山和約 (SFPT) 中，台灣處於"懸空割讓" 狀態。

3. Any claim that the ROC had to Formosa in the Fall of 1945 (as a result of the specifications of General Order no. 1) was invalidated as of late April 1952. This is because that claim was not perfected via confirmation of a territorial transfer to the ROC in the Treaty, in order to complete (what the international community would recognize as) a valid transfer of Taiwan's territorial title. After all, the ROC cannot claim title to a limbo cession.
3. 任何關於中華民國在 1945 年秋季對台灣的主張（根據一般命令第 1 號的規定）在 1952 年 04 月下旬都已失效。這是因為該主張沒有通過條約中對中華民國的領土轉讓確認，來完成 (國際社會所承認)之過戶手續。 畢竟，中華民國不能聲稱對懸空割讓領土的所有權。

4. When any territory is separated from its "mother country" in a peace treaty after war, but the "receiving state" (or "receiving country") of the transfer of legal ownership (i.e. sovereignty) is not specifically stated or specified, some people consider this to be a situation of incomplete cession. In fact, it is more properly viewed as a limbo cession.
4. 當任何領土在戰後和平條約中與其 "母國" 分開，但沒有具體說明或規定合法所有權（即主權） "授予的對象"（即"收受國"）時，有些人 認為這是一種不完全割讓的情況。 事實上，它更恰當地被視為一種懸空割讓。

5. The US Supreme Court has ruled that where the United States is the principal occupational authority, the sovereignty of a limbo cession is held in trust by the USMG as an interim status condition.
5. 美國最高法院曾裁定，在美國是主要佔領權國的情況下，美國軍政府(USMG) 以信託方式持有懸空割讓領土的主權，作為臨時狀態之條件。