Initially included in article 32 of the draft adopted on first reading by the ILC, following its introduction in Chapter V ARSIWA by Ago, distress was taken up again by Crawford in article 24. The notion draws, on the one hand, on force majeure and on the other hand, necessity. The proximity between necessity and distress has even led certain authors to criticize the distinction between them.1 Another view was expressed by Sørensen, who objected to the existence of a general principle authorizing the excuse of necessity but recognized the existence of rules aiming...
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full
to access all content.