The Precautionary Approach at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: the Southern Bluefin Tuna cases

2005 ◽  
Vol 5 (1/2) ◽  
pp. 78
Author(s):  
Howard S. Schiffman
Keyword(s):  
Bluefin Tuna ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
Precautionary Approach ◽  
Southern Bluefin Tuna ◽  
The Law

The Southern Bluefin Tuna (New Zealand v Japan; Australia v Japan) Cases

2000 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Kwiatkowska
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Bluefin Tuna ◽  
Prima Facie ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Arbitral Tribunal ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
Southern Bluefin Tuna ◽  
The Law

AbstractThe Southern Bluefin Tuna cases before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea resulted from disagreement between Australia, New Zealand and Japan related to the carrying out by Japan of an experimental fishing programme within the framework of the Convention for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna. The cases were the first instance of incidental proceedings on provisional measures under Article 290(5) of the LOS Convention and Article 25 of the ITLOS Statute, according to which ITLOS may prescribe provisional measures "if it considers that prima facie the tribunal which is to be constituted would have jurisdiction and that the urgency of the situation so requires". The article considers the parties' arguments for and against the use of provisional measures, considers the provisional measures ordered by ITLOS and the reasons therefor by comparison to the practice of the ICJs, and finally considers the establishment of an Arbitral Tribunal to hear the merits of the substantive case.

II International Tribunal For The Law Of The Sea The Southern Bluefin Tuna Cases (New Zealand v. Japan; Australia v. Japan): Order For Provisional Measures Of 27 August 1999

2000 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 979-990 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. R. Churchill
Keyword(s):  
Bluefin Tuna ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Arbitral Tribunal ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Southern Bluefin Tuna ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Law

Under Part XV of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, any dispute concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention which cannot be settled by the consensual means set out in section 1 of that Part, may be referred by any party to the dispute for compulsory settlement under section 2. There are four possible fora for such settlement—the International Court of Justice, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (hereafter ITLOS), an arbitral tribunal constituted in accordance with Annex VII of the Convention, and a special arbitral tribunal constituted in accordance with Annex VIII. If the parties to a dispute have made a declaration under Article 287 (which is optional) specifying their choice of forum, and their choices coincide, that body will be the forum for the settlement of the dispute. If their choices do not coincide or if not all parties have made a declaration, the forum for settlement will be an Annex VII arbitral tribunal.1

scholarly journals THE APPLICATION OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN INTERNATIONAL LAW: AN ANALYSIS OF THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE LAW OF THE SEA

2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (29) ◽  
pp. 229-259
Author(s):  
Tiago Vinicius Zanella ◽  
Ricardo Pereira Cabral
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Marine Environment ◽  
Precautionary Principle ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Scientific Uncertainty ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
Irreversible Damage ◽  
Precautionary Approach ◽  
The Precautionary Principle ◽  
The Law

The precautionary principle, invoking the notions of risk, scientific uncertainty and irreversible damage, takes the solution of the environmental issues of the global risk society to the legal domain. Its application in international law has evolved significantly, especially with respect to the protection of the marine environment. This principle, which was much ignored in its practical application, is gradually being used in international environmental protection. The purpose of this paper is to analyze how the jurisprudence of the ITLOS has contributed to the development and application of the precautionary principle for the protection of the marine environment and how the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea contributed to the development of this principle in international law. Thus, although we are still not able to safely say that the precautionary approach is included in international law as an unchallenged principle, it has been given great steps over the last few years in this direction. Particularly with the contributions of the international jurisprudence of the ITLOS, the precautionary approach is evolving and becoming an autonomous principle, with less uncertainty and subjectivity that caused so much apprehension for the States and doubt in the doctrine.

The Contribution of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea to the Protection of the Marine Environment

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 354-369
Author(s):  
Tomas Heidar
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Marine Environment ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Precautionary Approach ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessments ◽  
The Law

Abstract In its 25 years’ history, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea has dealt with a number of environmental cases. This has primarily occurred in the context of proceedings relating to the prescription of provisional measures and in advisory proceedings. This article explains how the Tribunal has reaffirmed and developed the basic environmental principles in Part XII of the Law of the Sea Convention, including the obligation to protect and preserve the marine environment, the precautionary approach, the duty to conduct environmental impact assessments, and the duty to cooperate, as well as the duty of due diligence, thereby contributing to the protection of the marine environment. Part XII of the Convention is a product of the 1970s and its provisions therefore reflect the state of international environmental law at that time. However, the Tribunal has interpreted and applied the aforementioned principles consistently with the contemporary state of international environmental law.

I. The Southern Bluefin Tuna Arbitration

2001 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 447-452 ◽  
Author(s):  
Malcolm D. Evans ◽  
Alan Boyle
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Bluefin Tuna ◽  
Prima Facie ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Arbitral Tribunal ◽  
The Pacific ◽  
Southern Bluefin Tuna ◽  
Tuna Fishing ◽  
The Law

Readers of last October's I.C.L.Q. will recall that this case started life in the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea when Australia and New Zealand were granted provisional measures against Japanese high seas tuna fishing in the Pacific.1 That Tribunal had held that the provisions of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (“1982 UNCLOS”) invoked by Australia and New Zealand appeared to afford a basis on which the jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal might be founded; that the fact that the 1993 Convention on Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna applied between the parties did not preclude recourse to the compulsory dispute settlement procedures in Part XV of the 1982 UNCLOS; and that an arbitral tribunal would prima facie have jurisdiction over the merits of the dispute.2 Notwithstanding this necessarily provisional view, when the parties then proceeded to arbitration, Japan maintained its initial preliminary objections, and the award handed down in August 2000 thus deals only with the jurisdiction of the arbitrators.3 The facts and background to the case are set out in the earlier case-note and need not be repeated here.

Dispute Concerning Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary between Mauritius and Maldives in the Indian Ocean, Preliminary Objections (ITLOS)

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-69
Author(s):  
Thomas Burri ◽  
Jamie Trinidad
Keyword(s):  
Indian Ocean ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
Maritime Boundary ◽  
The Indian Ocean ◽  
The Law ◽  
Arbitral Proceedings ◽  
Chagos Archipelago

On January 28, 2021, a Special Chamber of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) delivered a judgment in which it rejected preliminary objections raised by the Maldives in arbitral proceedings instituted by Mauritius, concerning the delimitation of the maritime boundary north of the Chagos Archipelago in the Indian Ocean.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document