INTERNATIONAL MARITIME DISPUTES AND PEACEFUL WAYS TO RESOLVE THEM

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 20-26
Author(s):  
Михаил Елизаров
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Future Generations ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Marine Resources ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Maritime Disputes ◽  
The Law ◽  
Settlement Of Disputes

In 1982, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea was adopted, founded upon the UN Charter, which encompasses the legal basis for ensuring the peaceful use of marine resources with a view to protecting the resource for future generations. The 1982 Law of the Sea Convention offers several options for the settlement of disputes. And yet, the established international maritime dispute settlement me- chanism currently in force is by no means complete and effective.

7 ITLOS’s Jurisprudential Contributions: Present and Future

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kittichaisaree Kriangsak
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Mineral Resources ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Future Challenges ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
Maritime Disputes ◽  
The Law ◽  
International Adjudication ◽  
Substantive Law

This chapter explores the present and future contributions of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS). Presently, ITLOS has made substantial contributions to the peaceful solution of ongoing maritime disputes and to international efforts against illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing. It has also provided guidance on the responsibility and liability regarding activities in the deep seabed area for the benefits of humankind as well as developed procedural rules and substantive law in international adjudication. Human rights at sea, marine environment protection and preservation, and delimitation of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles are some of the areas of the law of the sea elucidated by ITLOS’s rulings. Future challenges include legal issues pertaining to sea-level rise, dispute settlement as regards biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction, and potential contentious cases before the Seabed Disputes Chamber arising from exploitation of mineral resources in the deep seabed.

The Settlement of Disputes Arising From Conflicting Outer Continental Shelf Claims

2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 409-422 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Outer Continental Shelf ◽  
Rules Of Procedure ◽  
The Law ◽  
International Seabed Authority ◽  
Dispute Settlement System ◽  
Settlement Of Disputes

AbstractThis article begins with brief observations on the dispute-settlement system contained in the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOS Convention). It then reviews the rules of procedure of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (the Commission) which are designed to prevent or minimize disputes concerning outer continental shelf boundaries. In this context reference is made to joint submissions by coastal States. The role of the institutions created by the LOS Convention—the International Seabed Authority, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, in particular the Seabed Disputes Chamber, and the Commission—with respect to dispute settlement is examined. It also considers the circumstances when States Parties may or may not challenge the recommendations of the Commission.

Territorial Sovereignty Issues in Maritime Disputes: A Jurisdictional Dilemma for Law of the Sea Tribunals

2012 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irina Buga
Keyword(s):  
Subject Matter ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Territorial Sovereignty ◽  
Boundary Disputes ◽  
Maritime Boundary ◽  
Maritime Disputes ◽  
The Law

Abstract It is unclear whether Law of the Sea tribunals under the Law of the Sea Convention (LOSC, or the Convention) have jurisdiction to determine maritime boundary disputes involving concurrent land sovereignty issues. The text of the Convention and case law are silent in this respect. The only reference is in LOSC Article 298(1)(a)(i), which allows States to make declarations exempting maritime delimitations from compulsory dispute settlement, excluding concurrent territorial questions even from conciliation. However, it leaves unclear whether concurrent land sovereignty issues are also excluded in the absence of such declarations. There are indications that LOS tribunals may be able to decide ancillary land issues so long as these do not constitute the ‘very subject-matter’ of the dispute, or rely on an alternative jurisdictional basis. The question of competence over mixed disputes may be less extensive in effect than is often believed. States should not avoid initiating proceedings based on the view that LOS tribunals might not ultimately exercise jurisdiction.

scholarly journals Tarptautinio jūrų teisės tribunolo privalomosios jurisdikcijos taikymo problemos

Teisė ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 80 ◽  
pp. 95-106
Author(s):  
Justinas Linkevičius
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Settlement System ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement System ◽  
Settlement Of Disputes

Straipsnyje analizuojamos pagrindinės Tarptautinio jūrų teisės tribunolo privalomosios jurisdikcijos taikymo problemos, daugiausiai dėmesio skiriant 1982 m. Jungtinių Tautų jūrų teisės konvencijos privalomo ginčų sprendimo mechanizmo nuostatoms bei valstybių praktikai pasirenkant tribunolo jurisdikciją, taip pat vertinamas Tribunolo jurisdikcijos dėl šios konvencijos aiškinimo ar taikymo ir Tarptautinio Teisingumo Teismo jurisdikcijos pagal jo statuto 36 straipsnio 2 dalį santykis.This article analyses general problems of compulsory jurisdiction of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea putting the main focus on compulsory dispute settlement system provisions of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and discussing states’ practice of choosing the tribunal as the compulsory means for the settlement of disputes. It also approaches the question of relation between jurisdiction of the Tribunal and compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice based on article 36, paragraph 2, of its Statute.

scholarly journals International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea

2017 ◽  
pp. 38-48
Author(s):  
Tam Xuan Song
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Significant Contribution ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
East Asian ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
Effective Role ◽  
Maritime Disputes ◽  
The Law

Although most international disputes are resolved through political means, especially as bilateral discussions and suggestions, international decisions and an important element of arbitration dispute settlement. There are several organizations serving as a place to solve the laws of maritime disputes, but special judicial organs specially designed to conduct such disputes in the International Tribunal for the Sea Law (ITLOS). This article is mainly limited to the procedures and procedures of ITLOS, although it and some other judiciary will be compared. In addition, the views and practices of the settlement of judicial disputes in East Asian states will be examined based on the latest cases filed in ITLOSS. This article discusses the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and its relevance. The U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea seems to contemplate extensive jurisdiction for the Tribunal, but since its inception, the Tribunal has heard a very limited number and scope of cases, in part because disputants have other options for adjudication. This article provides a detailed discussion of the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. Then, it concludes in a positive note by emphasizing the tribunal's desire to analyze the important decisions of the tribunal and to create a more effective role in its existing institutional limitations, to ensure a significant contribution in the field of international law and judgment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document