International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary between Bangladesh and Myanmar in the Bay of Bengal (Bangladesh/Myanmar)

2012 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
pp. 840-915
Author(s):  
David P. Riesenberg
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-69
Author(s):  
Thomas Burri ◽  
Jamie Trinidad

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.


2008 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 601-642 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Churchill

AbstractThis is the fourth of a projected series of annual surveys reviewing dispute settlement under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. 2007 was the busiest year for dispute settlement in the law of the sea for some time. The main developments under Part XV of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea were the award of the arbitral tribunal in the Guyana/Suriname Case and two prompt-release-of-vessel judgments by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. Outside the framework of the Convention, the International Court of Justice gave judgments in two maritime boundary cases—one on the merits (Nicaragua v. Honduras) and the other on jurisdiction (Nicaragua v. Colombia).


2006 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Robin Churchill

AbstractThis is the first of a projected series of annual surveys reviewing dispute settlement under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea generally, rather than focusing purely on the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. The main developments during 2004 were the referral of two maritime boundary disputes in the Caribbean area to arbitration under Annex VII and a prompt release of vessel judgment by the ITLOS in the Juno Trader case.


Author(s):  
Evans Malcolm D

This chapter provides an overview of maritime boundary delimitation, drawing on its history whilst focusing on points of contemporary relevance. Topics covered include the delimitation of the territorial sea; the ‘equidistance’ or ‘equitable principles’ debate and the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC); the delimitation process; issues concerning the identification of the relevant area, islands, and low-tide elevations; the relevance of economic and jurisdictional issues to the delimitation process; and the 2014 Bay of Bengal Maritime Boundary Arbitration.


2013 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 563-614 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Churchill

Abstract This is the latest in a series of annual surveys reviewing dispute settlement in the law of the sea, both under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and outside the framework of the Convention. The main developments during 2012 were the delivery of judgments by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) in the Bangladesh/Myanmar case and by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the Nicaragua/Colombia case, both concerned with maritime boundary delimitation; and the institution of Annex VII arbitration by Argentina against Ghana relating to the arrest of a State-owned vessel and the subsequent order of provisional measures by the ITLOS. These and other developments are reviewed in detail below.


Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 155-163
Author(s):  
A. Yu. Klyuchnikov

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.


2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 603-616 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Churchill

AbstractThis is the fifth of a series of annual surveys reviewing dispute settlement under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. The main developments during 2008 were the fourth triennial elections to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea; an order made by the Tribunal further continuing the suspension of proceedings in the Swordfish case; and the referral of a maritime boundary dispute between Peru and Chile to the International Court of Justice.


2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 653-682 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Churchill

Abstract This is the latest in a series of annual surveys in this Journal reviewing dispute settlement in the law of the sea, both under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and outside the framework of the Convention. It covers developments in 2017. The most significant developments during the year were the judgment of the Special Chamber of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in the Ghana/Côte d’Ivoire maritime boundary case and the final award of the tribunal in the Croatia/Slovenia arbitration. There were also a number of less significant developments.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document