CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES IN INVESTMENT LAW: INTERFACES BETWEEN THE LAW OF TREATIES AND THE LAW OF STATE RESPONSIBILITY WITH A SPECIAL FOCUS ON THE ARGENTINE CRISIS
This chapter focuses on changed circumstances in investment law with a special focus on necessity. Section B first deals with the diverging findings of the different investment tribunals with respect to Argentina's necessity defence. After a brief description of the factual background and of the relevant standards under treaty law and the customary law of State responsibility, the tribunals' decisions will be discussed and a categorization of their approaches attempted. Section C analyzes the different approaches from a broader international law perspective. It is argued that the ‘separation/two-step approach’ which was adopted by the CMS Annulment Committee and the UNCITRAL tribunal is the one most in line with general international law.
Keywords: international law, necessity, investment tribunals, treaty interpretation, CMS Annulment Committee, UNCITRAL tribunal
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .