Table of Contents

Research Handbook on Sovereign Wealth Funds and International Investment Law

Research Handbook on Sovereign Wealth Funds and International Investment Law

Edited by Fabio Bassan

Research on the role of sovereign investments in a time of crisis is still unsatisfactory. This Research Handbook illustrates the state of the art of the legal investigation on sovereign investments, filling necessary gaps in previous research. Current focus is based on investment flows and trends, grounded in economic scenarios and objectives. Conversely, investigations from a legal standpoint are still few, namely disregarding the host states’ concerns about sovereign investments goals and tools. Hence, most of the many relevant drivers that affect current sovereign investments, be they FDI or portfolio investments, remain unexplained. This book investigates the juridical foundation of sovereign investments and extends our frontier of understanding.

Chapter 9: SWFs and State immunity: Overcoming the contradiction

Giovanna Adinolfi

Subjects: law - academic, finance and banking law, international investment law, public international law

Abstract

The contribution surveys SWF immunity from foreign jurisdiction from three perspectives. As a starting point, it is determined to what extent sovereign wealth funds fall under the subjective scope of rules on sovereign immunity. The definition of ‘foreign State’ is therefore investigated in order to define in which circumstances SWFs meet it. Next, the issue of their immunity from adjudication is ascertained. In this regard, the main point is whether SWFs’ investments are to be understood as actions engaged in within the exercise of sovereign authority, or as mere commercial activities, over which immunity from judgment on the merits is removed. Within this framework, the classical juxtaposition between the ‘nature test’ and the ‘purpose test’ is considered. As it may not be excluded that courts render judgments against SWFs, the rules on immunity from pre-judgment and post-judgment measures of constraint are considered so as to identify the property against which jurisdictional rulings may be enforced for the full satisfaction of the legitimate expectations of judgment creditors. The enquiry mainly focuses on the 2004 UN and the 1972 Council of Europe Conventions on sovereign immunity, by virtue of their impact on the design of national statutes as well as on judgments by national and international courts and tribunals. The practice under the 1976 US Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act and the 1978 UK State Immunity Act is also taken into account. Indeed, the United States and the United Kingdom are among the most important world financial centres where investments by SWFs may take place and, at the same time, their national courts have already passed plenty of judgments concerning some of the matters here considered. The practice of other States is also given appropriate consideration, insofar as it evidences the emergence or the existence of customary rules on sovereign immunities.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information