Risky Business: What Happens to Contracts Signed by Foreign Investors with Rebels During a Civil War once the Conflict Ends?

This article examines the question of what happens to contracts signed by foreign investors with rebels in the context of a civil war. The fate of contracts depends on the outcome of the fighting. When the insurgents are successful and establish a new government (or create a new state), the contracts are binding on the state. To the contrary, contracts signed by rebels that are ultimately unsuccessful in their attempt to overthrow the government will not, in general, be binding on the state. I believe, however, that there are some specific circumstances where that should not be the case. A state should be bound by a contract that has been signed by the rebels whenever its performance was not directly aimed at helping the rebels and their revolutionary struggle. The same outcome should also prevail whenever a contract was ultimately beneficial to the state and its population once the insurrection ended. Civil war, rebellion, insurgents, contract, state responsibility, state succession, beneficial to the state, Article 10 of the ILC Articles, object of contract