Defense of Necessity in International Law: Insights and Implications for Investor-State Dispute Settlements
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55640/jmsi-03-04-04Keywords:
Defence of Necessity, International Law, Investor-State Dispute SettlementAbstract
The "Defence of Necessity" is a crucial legal doctrine in international law, providing a framework for states to justify otherwise unlawful actions under exceptional circumstances. This doctrine, rooted in the necessity principle, allows states to act outside their legal obligations to preserve essential interests when facing imminent and grave peril. This study explores the application and impact of the Defence of Necessity within the realm of Investor-State Dispute Settlements (ISDS). By examining key case law and arbitral decisions, the paper highlights how this defence has been employed by states to counter claims of expropriation or breaches of investment treaties. It further analyzes the implications of such use for the balance between state sovereignty and investor protections, assessing how the doctrine shapes the resolution of disputes and influences legal precedents. Through a detailed analysis, the study aims to provide insights into the evolving interaction between international legal principles and investment arbitration, offering a nuanced understanding of the Defence of Necessity's role in contemporary ISDS practice.
Downloads
References
Abbott, R., Erixon, F., Ferracane, M.F. (2014). Demystifying Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), 5 ECIPE Occasional Paper.
Boed, R. (2014). State of Necessity as a Justification for Internationally Wrongful Conduct, 3 Yale Human Rights and Development Journal 4.
Brownlie, I. (1963). International Law and the Use of Force by States, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Burke-White, W.W., von Staden, A. (2010). Private Litigation in a Public Law Sphere: The Standard of Review in Investor-State Arbitrations, 35 YALE J. INT‘L L. 283, 283– 84.
Burleigh Cushing, R. (1928). The Doctrine of Necessity in International Law, Columbia University Press,.
Crawford, J. (2002). The International Law Commission‘s Articles on State Responsibility – Introduction, Text and Commentaries, Cambridge University Press.
Gross, O., Ni Aolain, F. (2001). Emergency, War and International Law – Another Perspective, 70 Nordic Journal of International Law 3.
Grotius, H. (1929). De Jure Belli Ac Pacis, Francis W. Kelsey trans., Oxford Clarendon Press.
Hershey, A.S. (1927). The Essentials of International Public Law and Organization, Macmillan Company, New York.
International Law Commission, Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, November 2001, Supplement No. 10 (A/56/10),article 25.
Okowa, P. (1999). Defences in the Jurisprudence of International Tribunals, in G. S. Goodwin-Gill and S. Talmon, The Reality of International Law; Essays in Honour of Ian Brownlie, Oxford University Press.
Salmon, J.A. (1984). Faut-il codifier l‘état de nécessité en droit international, in J. Makarczyk, (ed.), Essays in Honour of Judge Manfred Lachs, Martinus Nijhoff.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Hamza Ali Alghamdi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain the copyright of their manuscripts, and all Open Access articles are disseminated under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CC-BY), which licenses unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is appropriately cited. The use of general descriptive names, trade names, trademarks, and so forth in this publication, even if not specifically identified, does not imply that these names are not protected by the relevant laws and regulations.
Germany
United States of America
Italy
United Kingdom
France
Canada
Uzbekistan
Japan
Republic of Korea
Australia
Spain
Switzerland
Sweden
Netherlands
China
India
