Abstract
AbstractDoes the rise of international arbitration signify a retreat of the State from classical adjudication? In examining this question, it is important to distinguish contract-based arbitration of individual claims against the State from arbitration pursuant to investment treaties. The former is broadly limited to the private sphere of the State's activity, whereas the latter gives arbitrators a comprehensive jurisdiction over public law. An elaboration of this distinction, and the grey area within it, demonstrates that the significance of international arbitration for juridical sovereignty is its privatization of the authority to define the very concept of the public sphere.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Law,Political Science and International Relations
Reference109 articles.
1. citing Claim against the Empire of Iran (1963), 45 ILR 57, 80 (Ger Fed Const Ct).
2. Paulsson (n 34) 256
3. Maniruzzaman AFM , ‘State Contracts in Contemporary International Law: Monist versus Dualist Controversies’ (2001) 12 EJIL 309, 315.
4. Bowett , ‘State Contracts With Aliens’ (1988) 59 BYIL 49.
5. Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, 21 06 1985, UNCITRAL, UN Doc A/40/17, Annex I, 24 ILM 1302, Art 34–6.
Cited by
25 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. ENFORCEABILITY OF UMBRELLA CLAUSES BY INVESTMENT ARBITRATION TRIBUNALS;Erciyes Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi;2024-04-30
2. Between States and Firms;States, Firms, and Their Legal Fictions;2024-03-07
3. International Attribution;States, Firms, and Their Legal Fictions;2024-03-07
4. From a State-Oriented to a Human-Oriented Approach;The Human Rights Challenge to Immunity in International Law;2022
5. International Rule of Law and Its Relation to Harmonization;Blurry Boundaries of Public and Private International Law;2022