Corporations as Subjects of International Law: The Question Revisited in Light of Recent Developments in International Investment Law (L'entreprise, sujet de droit international, Retour sur la question a la lumiere des developpements recents du droit international des investissements)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The question of the international legal personality of transnational corporations arises at a time when they are the main operators of international trade and have become important actors in international relations. The doctrine, relying on ideological and political considerations rather than strict legal ones, has been divided on the issue whether corporations should be recognised an international legal personality. Our position is that a corporation may qualify as subject of international law to the extent that it holds rights and obligations and is given the possibility to commence a direct claim against a State before a tribunal of an international nature. This is, for instance, the situation prevailing in the context of some dispute settlement mechanisms in international investment law, which will be the object of our analysis. However, even in the field of international investment law, a corporation remains a minor subject of law with an international legal personality that is limited, derived, relative and functional.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.060 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.026 | 0.027 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.015 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".