Some Observations on the Calvo Clause
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9560336 |
|---|---|
| Authors | A H Feller (corresponding author) |
| Year | 1933 |
| Volume | 27 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 461-468 |
| Publication date | 1933-07-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | American Journal of International Law (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0002-9300 • E-ISSN: 2161-7953 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.2307/2189974 |
| OpenAlex | W2334001508 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 1 |
In the case of the Mexican Union Railway, Ltd., decided in February, 1930, the British-Mexican Claims Commission, set up in accordance with the Convention of November 19,1926, added another stone to the somewhat unsteady structure of decisions on the Calvo Clause. The majority of the Commissioners enthusiastically adopted the considerationsof the United States-Mexican General Claims Commission in the North American Dredging Case, “ not thinking it necessary to repeat them, or possible to express them better.” Even the British Commissioner, Sir John Percival, who dissented, differed from the majority mainly in regard to the application of the opinion in the North American Dredging Case to the case at bar, and was not less cordial in his approval of that opinion
Commission · Convention · Dredging · Political science · Geology · History · International Arbitration and Investment Law · Law · Oceanography
| Highly cited | No |
|---|