Submissions to the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf: The Practice of Developing States in Cases of Disputed and Unresolved Maritime Boundary Delimitations or Other Land or Maritime Disputes. Part Two

2013 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 615-679
Author(s):  
Barbara Kwiatkowska
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Trinidad And Tobago ◽  
North Africa ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Maritime Boundary ◽  
State Practice ◽  
Maritime Disputes ◽  
Present Part

Abstract This is the second part of a two-part article surveying state practice regarding Disputed and Unresolved Maritime Boundary Delimitations or Other Land or Maritime Disputes under the Rules of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS). It reviews basic principles and the interpretation of the 1982 UN Law of the Sea Convention and the CLCS Rules. As the 2006 Barbados/Trinidad and Tobago Award and the 2012 ITLOS Bangladesh v. Myanmar Judgment reaffirmed, the CLCS Recommendations must in no way prejudice existing and prospective boundary delimitations, nor must they prejudice other land or maritime disputes. All practical means of giving effect to such “without prejudice” principles are carefully analysed. Part One covers Latin America and the Wider Caribbean, Northeast and Southeast Asia, and the South Pacific. The present Part Two covers South Asia and the Middle East, East Africa-Indian Ocean, South Africa, West Africa and North Africa.

Submissions to the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf: The Practice of Developing States in Cases of Disputed and Unresolved Maritime Boundary Delimitations or Other Land or Maritime Disputes. Part One

2013 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 219-341 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Kwiatkowska
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Trinidad And Tobago ◽  
North Africa ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Maritime Boundary ◽  
State Practice ◽  
Maritime Disputes ◽  
Present Part

Abstract This is the first part of a two-part article surveying state practice regarding Disputed and Unresolved Maritime Boundary Delimitations or Other Land or Maritime Disputes under the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) Rules. It reviews basic principles and the interpretation of the 1982 UN Law of the Sea Convention and the CLCS Rules. As the 2006 Annex VII Barbados/Trinidad and Tobago Award and the 2012 ITLOS Bangladesh v. Myanmar Judgment reaffirmed, the CLCS Recommendations must in no way prejudice existing and prospective boundary delimitations, nor must they prejudice other land or maritime disputes. All practical means of giving effect to such “without prejudice” principles are carefully analysed. The present Part covers Latin America and the Wider Caribbean, Northeast and Southeast Asia, and the South Pacific. Part Two will cover South Asia and the Middle East, East Africa—Indian Ocean, South Africa, West Africa and North Africa.

scholarly journals Outer Limits of the Continental Shelf and "Disputed Areas": State Practice concerning Article 76(10) of the LOS Convention

2006 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 461-487 ◽  
Author(s):  
Constance Johnson ◽  
Alex Oude Elferink
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Present Article ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Coastal State ◽  
State Practice ◽  
Rules Of Procedure ◽  
Maritime Disputes ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Relationship

AbstractArticle 76 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOS Convention) requires a coastal State to submit information on the limits of its continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS). The Commission shall make recommendations to the coastal State on matters related to the establishment of the outer limits of the continental shelf. In a case where the coastal State establishes the outer limits on the basis of these recommendations, they are final and binding. However, Article 76(10) provides that the "The provisions of this article are without prejudice to the question of delimitation of the continental shelf between States with opposite or adjacent coasts". The relationship between Article 76 and the delimitation of the continental shelf between neighboring States and other "unresolved land or maritime disputes" has been addressed by the CLCS in its Rules of Procedure. The present article analyzes the significance of Article 76(10) for submissions to the CLCS, looking at the Rules of Procedure of the Commission and the submissions that have been made to the Commission to date.

La zone économique exclusive dans la pratique des États

1998 ◽  
Vol 35 ◽  
pp. 3-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francis Rigaldies
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
State Practice ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law

SummaryThe use of the concept of an exclusive Economie zone has increased since the adoption of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. However, the characterization of this zone varies greatly between States. This article presents an exhaustive survey of the concept of an exclusive Economie zone. The author discusses the types of jurisdiction exercised by States in their uses of an exclusive Economie zone. Disparity exists between the provisions of the Convention and State practice in some specific areas: for example, the provisions on the environment and on scientific research. Despite these exceptions, the author maintains that the basic tenets of the Convention are respected in State practice. State declarations as well as arbitral and judicial decisions show that the Convention and State practice are together evolving to reinforce the basic principles of the concept of an exclusive Economie zone.

Geomatics Aspects of the UN Convention on Law of the Sea – A Case Study

2002 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 443-449
Author(s):  
Ahmed El-Rabbany
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Natural Resources ◽  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Maritime Boundary ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Maritime Boundary Delimitation

The United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) came into force on November 18, 1994 to provide the legal framework for maritime boundary delimitation. Understanding the geomatics aspects of UNCLOS is vital for coastal nations to claim the ownership of the natural resources within the limits of their Continental Shelf. This paper discusses some of the geomatics aspects of UNCLOS, namely the geodetic and uncertainty issues. A case study for Egypt's outer limits is also presented.

The Problem of Delimitation of Bangladesh’s Maritime Boundaries with India and Myanmar: Prospects for a Solution

2010 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 405-423 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Shah Alam ◽  
Abdullah Al Faruque
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resources ◽  
Mineral Resources ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Coastal Zones ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Fish Stocks ◽  
Maritime Boundary ◽  
State Practice ◽  
Maritime Boundary Delimitation

AbstractThe sea areas of Bangladesh are reportedly rich in straddling fish stocks and mineral resources, including hydrocarbons. But a long-standing dispute over maritime boundary delimitation with India and Myanmar remains a major stumbling block in exploration of these resources. The overlapping claims of these three countries over the maritime zones in the Bay of Bengal need to be settled for peaceful exploration of natural resources. While India and Myanmar want to delimit the maritime boundary on the basis of the equidistance principle, Bangladesh demands that delimitation should be based on the equitable method. The special geographical circumstances of the coastal zones of these countries warrant that any delimitation, whether agreed or determined by a third party, must result in an equitable solution. The decisions of the international courts and tribunals, state practice, and the Law of the Sea Convention clearly demonstrate that there has been a shift from the equidistance principle to the equitable principle of delimitation and strongly indicate that the equitable principle is the preferred method of delimitation.

Maritime Delimitation in the Black Sea Case (Romania v. Ukraine)

2009 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 305-327 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Anderson
Keyword(s):  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Black Sea ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
The Black Sea ◽  
Continental Shelves ◽  
Maritime Boundary ◽  
The Icj ◽  
Stage Process ◽  
The Law

AbstractIn a unanimous decision, the ICJ determined, in accordance with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, the single maritime boundary between the respective EEZs and continental shelves of Romania and Ukraine. The Court clarified its methodology for delimiting the EEZ/continental shelf, following a three-stage process. First, it drew a provisional equidistance line between what it decided were the most appropriate basepoints on the two coasts; secondly, it considered whether this line required adjustment; and finally, it verified that the line did not lead to an inequitable result. The Judgment contains important interpretations of several articles in the Convention, notably Articles 74 and 83.

Islands and the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf: A Framework for Analysis

1977 ◽  
Vol 71 (4) ◽  
pp. 642-673 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald E. Karl
Keyword(s):  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Analytical Model ◽  
Relative Size ◽  
Exclusive Economic Zone ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Relative Location ◽  
The Third ◽  
State Practice ◽  
Economic Zone ◽  
The Law

This article examines one of the recurring problems in the law of the sea—the treatment of islands in the delimitation of the continental shelf between opposite and adjacent states—in light of developments at the Third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea, in particular, the adoption of “equitable principles” as the standard for delimitation of the continental shelf and exclusive economic zone between adjacent and opposite states. On the assumption that the content of these equitable principles may be derived from contemporary state practice in maritime delimitations, this state practice is used as a basis for the construction of an analytical model of the continental shelf problem of islands. This model relies primarily on an island's relative location and secondarily on its relative size with respect to the delimiting states. It provides a framework for determining how an island should be treated in a given delimitation. Though the model is, out of necessity, based upon state practice in continental shelf delimitations, the premises underlying the model are not so limited and thus the general principles derived from this analysis will have an important bearing on the new problem of the delimitation of the exclusive economic zone.

Is There a Hierarchical Relationship between Natural Prolongation and Distance in the Continental Shelf Delimitation?

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xuexia Liao
Keyword(s):  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Positive Answer ◽  
Exclusive Economic Zone ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Coastal State ◽  
Hierarchical Relationship ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The Law ◽  
Constraint Approach ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract If a coastal State claims a continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles (nm) that intrudes into the 200-nm limit of another State, the problem arises as to whether there is a hierarchical relationship between natural prolongation and distance, the two criteria of entitlement to the continental shelf provided by Article 76 of the un Convention on the Law of the Sea. A positive answer would mean that the continental shelf beyond 200 nm cannot encroach upon the 200-nm limit, otherwise there would be an area of overlapping entitlements which calls for maritime delimitation. This article attempts to analyse this problem from the perspectives of Article 76, relevant judicial cases, State practice, and the relationship between the regimes of the continental shelf and the Exclusive Economic Zone. It is submitted that the law is not conclusive, though a majority of coastal States tend to adopt a self-constraint approach. In addition, this problem brings further challenges to the law of maritime delimitation.

scholarly journals On Delineation of the Continental Shelf: Decision of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea on Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary between Bangladesh and Myanmar, 2012

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 155-163
Author(s):  
A. Yu. Klyuchnikov
Keyword(s):  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
Exploration And Exploitation ◽  
International Court ◽  
Maritime Boundary ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law ◽  
Marine Areas

With the development of technical capabilities for the exploration and exploitation of the continental shelf, the desire of coastal states to expand the area of their jurisdiction in the "underwater territory" (the territory of the seabed) increased. Thanks to the activism of the judges of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, the concept of the continental shelf for the purposes of international maritime law has been significantly developed. As a result, the coastal states signatories to the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea were able to establish the outer limit of the continental shelf, which, under certain conditions, can extend even beyond 350 nautical miles from the baseline.Disputes between states on the continental shelf mainly arise in connection with the need to distinguish between marine areas rich in sources of living and non-living resources. In such cases, it may be necessary to delineate the continental shelf between adjacent States (with a common border) or located opposite each other, i.e. their delimitation under article 83 of the Convention on the Law of the Sea. The subject of the dispute is the external legal boundary of the continental shelf of the state, where it extends beyond 200 nautical miles from the baseline of that state (the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles), adjoins the area that is the common heritage of mankind, outside the jurisdiction of any of the states.On the issue of determining the limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles, the decision of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea of 14.03.2012 "On delimitation of maritime boundary between Bangladesh and Myanmar" is of a precedent value, since no international court has previously addressed this issue.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document