Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T04:50:12.774Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Seizure of Property and Enterprises in Indonesia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2009

Lord McNair
Lord McNair
Affiliation:
3 Essex Court, Temple, London.
Get access

Extract

A vast amount has been written, in books and articles, upon the subject of the seizure by Governments of foreign-owned property, whether the process is called Nationalization or Expropriation or by some other name. I propose, however, to confine myself mainly to the relevant law laid down by tribunals, both international and national, in dealing with the matter and to the practice of States— these two sources being the principal sources of international law, and I shall cite very few authors. Law becomes more concrete when applied to the particular facts of an actual incident, and in such circumstances it is easier to distinguish between lex lata and lex ferenda; it is only the former that I am concerned with now.

Type
Articles
Information
Netherlands International Law Review , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , September 1959 , pp. 218 - 256
Copyright
Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 1959

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 218 note 1 Given to De Ondernemersraad voor Indonesia, The Hague.

page 223 note 1 British and Foreign State Papers, Vol. 81, pp. 688–691.Google Scholar

page 224 note 1 Moore, , Arbitrations, at p. 1869.Google Scholar

page 224 note 2 State Papers, Vol. 81 (1888–1889), p. 691.Google Scholar

page 224 note 3 Scott, , Hague Court Reports (second series) pp. 1–30.Google Scholar

page 224 note 4 Ibid., p. 28.

page 225 note 1 For the French original text, see Scott, ibid., p. 199; le droit conventionnel, etc. should be translated “the law contained in treaties and conventions applicable thereto”.

page 230 note 1 Extract from Reports of International Arbitral Awards, Vol. II, p. 909.Google Scholar

page 230 note 2 Cf. sur ce point arrêt No. 7 de la Cour de La Haye.

page 230 note 3 Arrêt No. 7 de la Cour de La Haye.

page 230 note 4 Art. 52 de la Convention internationale de La Haye de 1907; Tribunal roumano-allemand, arrêt Uschersohn contre Etat allemand, Recueil des Décisions des Tribunaux arbitraux mixtes, t. IV, p. 828Google Scholar; Tribunal gréco-allemand, sentence Karmatzucas, , Recueil des Décisions des Tribunaux arbitraux mixtes, t. VII, p. 21.Google Scholar (Notes 2, 3 and 4 occur in the original).

page 231 note 1 Annual Digest of Public International Law Cases 1927–1928, No. 59.Google Scholar

page 231 note 1 Ibid. No. 60.

page 240 note 1 For the contrary view, see United States of America (Dickson Car Wheel Co.) v. United Mexican States, Annual Digest of Public International Law Cases, 1931–1932Google Scholar, No. 115, where a Claims Commission said:

“There is no doubt that at the present time that theory [unjust enrichment] is accepted and applied generally by the countries of the world, even in the absence of a specific law, but the difficulty rests in fixing the limits within which it can and must be applied. … It is obvious that the theory of unjust enrichment as such has not yet been transplanted to the field of international Law as this is of a juridical order distinct from local or private law.”

page 247 note 1 Upon which see the Consultation by Edouart Clunet, extracts from which are to be found in P.C.I. J. Publications, Ser. C. No. 75, the Oscar China Case, p. 51.Google Scholar