Article 76 - Definition of the Continental Shelf (II)UN Convention on the Law of the Sea Commentary 1982 Online

2014 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
The Law ◽  
Definition Of

Article 76 of the LOSC on the Definition of the Continental Shelf: Questions concerning its Interpretation from a Legal Perspective

2006 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 269-285 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Oude Elferink
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
The Third ◽  
Complex Process ◽  
Legal Perspective ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Law ◽  
Definition Of

AbstractThe establishment of the outer limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles under Article 76 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC) is a complex process, which requires a coastal state to dedicate significant resources. To understand the reasons for the inclusion of this complex provision in the LOSC, this article first looks at the origins of Article 76. Subsequently, a number of provisions of Article 76 are considered to illustrate the questions which exist in connection with its application and interpretation. It is concluded that Article 76 fulfills the mandate that had been given to the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea in respect of the definition of the limits of national jurisdiction, notwithstanding the complexity of the issue and the interests involved. Before the Third Conference started there was no certainty about the extent of the continental shelf. Article 76 provides a procedure to arrive at precisely defined outer limits. Once Article 76 will have been implemented by all the present states parties to the Convention, most of the outer limits of the continental shelf vis-à-vis the Area will be defined in precise terms.

Ridge Issues

2000 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Taft ◽  
Hideo Kagami
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Continental Margin ◽  
Outer Edge ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Oceanic Ridge ◽  
Coastal State ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Law ◽  
Definition Of

The Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea sought to establish a definition of the continental shelf that would accommodate the interests of a number, albeit a minority, of coastal States. This included consideration of various submarine elevations, including ridges, and their relationship to the regime of the continental shelf. For a variety of reasons, submarine and oceanic ridges have proved to be contentious. Indeed, this chapter proved to be the most difficult of all the chapters in this book to obtain a text to which all the authors, scientists, and lawyers could agree. Therefore, rather than produce an anodyne chapter which might have summarized only those areas of agreement, we considered it best to also cover areas where agreement was lacking. This provides the reader with both sides of the argument and the opportunity to reach their own view on the basis of the evidence presented. Some of the contentious areas are . . . i. Whether or not article 76 should be interpreted in such a manner as to preclude a country situated on a ridge from having a continental shelf beyond 200 M. ii. Whether bathymetry (reflecting geomorphology) should be given more or less weight than, or the same weight as geology in any consideration of a continental shelf beyond 200 M, including extension along an oceanic ridge, iii. Whether the fact that article 76 refers to the continental shelf being a natural prolongation of the land territory "to the outer edge of the continental margin" means that it can (or cannot) be applied to an island sitting on top of an oceanic ridge, iv. Whether or not article 76 can be interpreted in such a way as to allow a coastal State to "jump" its claim from the margin onto an adjacent ridge. v. Whether or not article 76 limits the use of ridges so that coastal States do not unreasonably extend their continental shelf regime. . . . Ultimately, for the answers to these questions, the reader will need to look to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (the Commission), together with the outcome of diplomacy.

The International Seabed Authority and Article 82 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea

2006 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 323-333 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Lodge
Keyword(s):  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Deep Sea ◽  
International Community ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Sea Bed ◽  
The Law ◽  
International Seabed Authority ◽  
Definition Of

AbstractSince the entry into force in 1994 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (the LOSC), a great deal of attention has been focused on the implementation of Article 76 of the Convention, which establishes the juridical definition of the continental shelf. In comparison, very little attention has been given to Article 82, which provides that payments or contributions in kind are to be made by coastal states in respect of the exploitation of the non-living resources of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles. Those payments or contributions in kind are to be distributed by the International Seabed Authority to developing states, "particularly the least developed and the land-locked amongst them". The Convention provides little guidance as to how Article 82 might be implemented in practice. The basic idea behind the provision is quite straightforward. But the text suffers from a lack of precision and raises numerous questions of interpretation. In this presentation, the author illustrates some of the difficult issues of principle and of practice that Article 82 raises. There is a strong possibility that the first source of revenue for the international community from the resources of the deep sea-bed is likely to be the payments or contributions made through Article 82. For that reason, it is important that the difficulties associated with Article 82 are resolved sooner rather than later in order to avoid potential future disputes over the interpretation and application of the Article as well as to provide certainty to industry anxious to promote activities on the continental shelf.

The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf and its Disturbing Propensity to Legislate

2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 355-383 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Serdy
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Continental Shelves ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law

AbstractCreated by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea to apply the rules in Article 76 on the outer limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles from States’ territorial sea baselines, the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf has on several occasions introduced new requirements for States not supported by Article 76, or impermissibly qualifying the rights Article 76 accords them. This article focuses on several such instances, one to the coastal State’s advantage (though temporally rather than spatially), another neutral (though requiring unnecessary work of States), but the remainder all tending to reduce the area of continental shelves. The net effect has been to deprive States of areas of legal continental shelf to which a reasonable interpretation of Article 76 entitles them, and in one case even of their right to have their submissions examined on their merits, even though, paradoxically, the well-meaning intention behind at least some of the Commission’s pronouncements was to avoid other controversies.

The Application of the Law of Occupation in Maritime Zones and Rights to ‘Occupied’ Marine Resources

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
Shani Friedman
Keyword(s):  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Exclusive Economic Zone ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Marine Resources ◽  
Occupied State ◽  
Economic Zone ◽  
The Law ◽  
New Perspective

Abstract This article seeks to contribute to the emerging literature concerning the application of belligerent occupation in maritime zones of the occupied State. It supports the approach that the law of occupation and the law of the sea apply simultaneously in case of occupation of coastal States, offering a new perspective on the jurisdiction of the occupying power to exploit marine resources in the occupied State’s continental shelf and exclusive economic zone. This perspective highlights some issues that have been ignored in the literature thus far to better understand the rights and obligations of the relevant Parties with respect to maritime zones of the occupied State.

The Work of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf: Current Accomplishments and Challenges on the Verge of Its 20th Anniversary

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-70
Author(s):  
Paula M. Vernet
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
20Th Anniversary ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law ◽  
Conditions Of Work

2017 marks the 20th anniversary of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS), in coincidence with its 43rd session. This session has been the last before the expiration of the term of office of its current members. Elections were held in June. During this five year period, the CLCS faced great challenges: the workload of the Commission increased dramatically, stays in New York became longer, conditions of work became an issue; the complexity of the Submissions required new interpretations and more time for their consideration; new revised Submissions were made and brought new alterations in the order of Submissions on the list waiting to be analysed. This article provides some views on the work carried out by the CLCS following the election of members of the Commission at the twenty-second Meeting of States Parties to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, held in June 2012, up to December 2016, in an attempt to assess the accomplishments and challenges of the last five years.

Patterns of Development in International Fishery Law

1974 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 37-47
Author(s):  
Gerald R. Ottenheimer
Keyword(s):  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
The Past ◽  
Fishery Resources ◽  
Legal Problems ◽  
The Law ◽  
Ocean Law ◽  
International Fisheries

The uncertainty surrounding the outcome of the imminent Law of the Sea Conference is inevitable in the light of the lack of consensus on many of the most pressing problems of ocean law. Nowhere is this lack of agreement more evident than in the law regulating the world’s fishery resources.During the past few years the attention of international lawyers and experts in related disciplines has been focused on the crucial considerations of continental shelf and ocean bed resources. Yet the legal problems related to international fisheries persist and increase.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document