Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wg55d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T14:25:14.787Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

8 - Arbitration clauses in sovereign debt instruments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2011

Michael Waibel
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Get access

Summary

As long as absolute sovereign immunity closed national courts to sovereign creditors, arbitration rudimentarily filled the resulting gap in creditor protection. In the second half of the nineteenth century and prior to World War II, arbitration clauses in sovereign debt instruments were quite common. Once national courts started to hear sovereign debt cases, the need for such arbitration clauses declined. After World War II, these arbitration clauses became extremely rare.

Modern sovereign debt instruments almost invariably submit to the jurisdiction of national courts in important financial centres. Today's sovereign bonds rarely contain arbitration clauses. Brazilian government bonds, which occasionally incorporate UNCITRAL arbitration clauses, are the exception. They include arbitration clauses alongside providing for the jurisdiction of Brazilian courts because Brazilian law prohibits submission to external courts.

Arbitration clauses before the twentieth century

The Jay Treaty of 1794 created the first mixed claims commission to deal with Britain's claims regarding ‘[d]ebts … which were bona fide contracted before the Peace’. It stipulated arbitration to settle debts incurred before the American Revolution, maritime claims, and the Maine boundary dispute with Britain.

In the nineteenth century, arbitration clauses in sovereign debt contracts were quite common. A good example is Article 31 in the agreement to restructure Costa Rica's external debt in 1884. The debt restructuring of Entre Rios province likewise provided for arbitration on whether special types of claims had received adequate consideration, so as to avoid delaying the implementation of the agreement or risk non-acceptance. Lord Rothschild acted as sole arbitrator.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

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.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×