Log in

Relevant bibliographies by topics / ITLOS / Journal articles

To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: ITLOS.

Journal articles on the topic 'ITLOS'

Author: Grafiati

Published: 4 June 2021

Last updated: 11 February 2022

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles

Select a source type:

Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'ITLOS.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.

1

Tanaka, Yoshifumi. "Reflections on the Advisory Jurisdiction of itlos as a Full Court: The itlos Advisory Opinion of 2015." Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 14, no. 2 (August 24, 2015): 318–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718034-12341296.

Full text

Abstract:

In its advisory opinion of 2 April 2015, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (itlos) broke new ground in the itlos jurisprudence, by stating that the full Tribunal has an advisory jurisdiction. However, the legal basis of the advisory jurisdiction of itlos as a full court is not free from controversy. An issue also arises with regard to the admissibility of the request for an advisory opinion. Given that the itlos jurisprudence concerning advisory proceedings is still in its early stages, the advisory jurisdiction of itlos as a full court deserves serious consideration. Thus, this contribution will seek to examine the legal basis of the advisory jurisdiction of itlos as a full court and the admissibility of the request for an advisory opinion by focusing on the 2015 itlos advisory opinion.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

2

Meinarni, Ni Putu Suci. "PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA PENCEMARAN LINGKUNGAN LAUT DALAM KASUS TUMPAHAN MINYAK MONTARA DI LAUT TIMOR." Jurnal Magister Hukum Udayana (Udayana Master Law Journal) 5, no. 4 (May 31, 2017): 833. http://dx.doi.org/10.24843/jmhu.2016.v05.i04.p14.

Full text

Abstract:

Diplomacy as a means of communication made by various parties, including the negotiations between representations who have been recognized or defined as well as the negotiations when it was not possible to see a bright spot, the one party or two countries who consider necessary, can choose the path of another in the settlement of disputes. Regarding the case Montara, Indonesia can choose the legal path is through ITLOS. When all lanes closed negotiations and diplomacy, international legal channels under the umbrella of ITLOS is open for the settlement of cases of oil spills in the Montara platform. If ITLOS considered too early to have as a line dispute resolution, since the country rarely choose ITLOS as a settlement of the dispute, as evidenced since it entry into force (between 1994 to 2006), only 13 cases were handled by ITLOS, and in UNCLOS itself is possible for more flexible judicial selection and Arbitration still in the high demand. Diplomasi sebagai suatu cara komunikasi yang dilakukan oleh berbagai pihak termasuk negosiasi antara wakil-wakil yang sudah diakui atau yang diartikan pula sebagai perundingan-perundingan ketika sudah tidak memungkinkan untuk menemui titik terang maka salah satu pihak maupun kedua negara yang mengganggap perlu, dapat memilih jalur lain dalam penyelesaian sengketa. Berkaitan dengan kasus Montara, Indonesia dapat memilih jalur hukum yaitu melalui ITLOS. Bila semua jalur negosiasi dan diplomasi tertutup, jalur hukum internasional dibawah payung ITLOS terbuka untuk penyelesaian kasus tumpahan minyak di sumur Montara. Apabila ITLOS dianggap terlalu dini untuk dipilih sebagai jalur penyelesaian sengketa, karena memang negara jarang sekali memilih ITLOS sebagai tempat penyelesaian sengketa, terbukti sejak entry into force (diantara tahun 1994 sampai dengan tahun 2006), hanya 13 kasus yang di tangani ITLOS di dalam UNCLOS masih memungkinkan adanya pilihan peradilan yang lebih fleksbel dan lebih diminati oleh negara-negara yaitu Arbitrase.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

3

Oanta, Gabriela A. "The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the Polar Regions." Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 13, no. 3 (November 25, 2014): 286–305. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718034-12341278.

Full text

Abstract:

The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (itlos) was created by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (unclos) as a mechanism for the settlement of disputes that may arise in relation to the interpretation or application of the provisions of the Convention or of an international agreement regarding the purposes of the Convention. So far, no claim regarding the polar regions as a whole has been brought before the itlos. However, in certain aspects these regions have been present in the activity of the itlos. This article is divided into two main parts. The first part presents an analysis of the present and future activities of the itlos regarding the Arctic. In the second part, the issues referring to the Antarctic lato senso brought to the itlos will be examined. So far, the Antarctic has received greater attention from the itlos than the Arctic.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

4

McCreath, Millicent, and Zoe Scanlon. "Prospects for the Future Use of ITLOS Ad Hoc Special Chambers after the Ghana/Côte d’Ivoire Case." Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 17, no. 2 (August 17, 2018): 309–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718034-12341382.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract The maritime boundary delimitation decision in the Ghana/Côte d’Ivoire Case is remarkable as the first decision of an ad hoc chamber of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS). This article evaluates the advantages of this critically under-examined dispute settlement mechanism, its operation in this case and the consequent prospects for the future use of such chambers. To date, the ad hoc chambers of both ITLOS and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) have rarely been used. Examining their respective procedures, legal frameworks, and performance, this article evaluates the comparative advantages and disadvantages of ITLOS ad hoc chambers vis-à-vis both ad hoc arbitration and the full bench of ITLOS. Although limited conclusions on the prospects for the mechanism’s future use can be drawn from this single decision, in light of the broadly positive outcome, prospective parties may be drawn to the possibilities and potential advantages of the ITLOS ad hoc chamber mechanism in the future.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

5

McDorman, Ted L. "An Overview of International Fisheries Disputes and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea." Canadian Yearbook of international Law/Annuaire canadien de droit international 40 (2003): 119–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0069005800008018.

Full text

Abstract:

SummaryAlthough there have been few international adjudications dealing directly with fishing disputes in the past, all but one of the cases before ITLOS have been fisheries cases. This article first reviews the different ways in which a fisheries dispute can get before ITLOS and considers the disputes that have been on the docket of ITLOS so far. These have resulted in five decisions on requests for prompt release, two decisions on request for provisional measures, but only one decision on the merits of a dispute. The conclusion is that ITLOS has played a useful role in fisheries dispute settlement particularly when contrasted with the history of international dispute settlement for fisheries disputes.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

6

O'Keefe, Roger. "ITLOS FLAGS ITS INTENT." Cambridge Law Journal 59, no. 3 (November 16, 2000): 421–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197300230201.

Full text

Abstract:

The M/V “Saiga” (No. 2) (Saint Vincent and the Grenadines v. Guinea) (1999) 38 I.L.M. 1323 was, on the facts if not on the docket, the continuation and conclusion of The M/V “Saiga” 110 I.L.R. 736, the first case to be heard by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) established under the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea. The cases arose out of an incident in which the Saiga—a Cypriot-owned, Scottish-managed and Swiss-chartered tanker flying the flag of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines—was detected refuelling fishing vessels at sea (“bunkering”) in the Exclusive Economic Zone, and in violation of the customs laws, of Guinea. Guinean patrol craft forcibly arrested the Saiga, injuring a Ukrainian crewman and a Senegalese painter, and escorted the ship to port, where its Ukrainian master was convicted of customs offences. As well as a suspended sentence of six months’ imprisonment, the court imposed a substantial fine, seizing the vessel and confiscating its cargo by way of guarantee.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

7

Kwiatkowska, Barbara. "The Saint Vincent and the Grenadines v. Guinea M/V Saiga Cases." Leiden Journal of International Law 11, no. 3 (September 1998): 547–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156598000399.

Full text

Abstract:

The article surveys the Saint Vincent and the Grenadines v. Guinea M/V Saiga cases which inaugurated jurisprudence of the 21 Member International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) in Hamburg, Germany, with delivery of two important decisions on prompt release of the vessel and its crew (1997, Case No. 1) and on provisional measures of protection (1998, Case No. 2). The decisions provided precedential instances of application by the Tribunal of Articles 292 and 290 of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea respectively, and of the relevant provisions of the ITLOS Rules. The prescription of provisional measures of protection formed the incidental proceedings of the pending M/V Saiga (Merits) case which is to be settled by ITLOS in mid-1999 (Case No. 2) and is to be the subject of a separate article. In view of the ITLOS Statute and the Rules being closely modelled in the Statute and the Rules of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), careful attention is given to comparison of the inaugural practice of ITLOS with the longstanding practice of the ICJ, and preservation of judicial consistency by ITLOS is particularly commended. A history of the M/V Saiga dispute, intertwined with domestic proceedings before Guinean courts, is for the reader's convenience outlined in a Chronological Table annexed to this article.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

8

Huang, Michelle Viandy. "THE KERCH STRAIT INCIDENT: IS THERE A BREACH OF INTERNATIONAL LAW?" Legal Standing : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 4, no. 1 (April 25, 2020): 57. http://dx.doi.org/10.24269/ls.v4i1.2075.

Full text

Abstract:

On 23th November 2018, the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation ("FSB") destroyed and captured three of Ukrainian Military Vessel, as well as detaining 24 of its personnels. As the dispute continues, Ukraine raised this matter to the International Tribunals on Law of The Sea (“ITLOS”), requesting a provisional measure pursuant to Article 280 paragraph 5 UNCLOS to release the vessels and personnels detained. ITLOS has made its order on 25th May 2019, ruling that Russia must release the detainee and return the vessels immediately to Ukraine. However, Russia refused to enforce the order and denied ITLOS jurisdiction over this matter due to the involvement of military aspect in the incident. Therefore, this paper provides an answer to the questions whether Russia’s act constitutes a violation to international law and whether ITLOS has the jurisdiction over the dispute.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

9

Chandrasekhara Rao, P. "ITLOS: The First Six Years." Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law Online 6, no. 1 (January 1, 2002): 183–288. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/138946302775159389.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

10

Chandrasekhara Rao, P. "ITLOS: The First Six Years." Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law Online 6, no. 1 (2002): 183–300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/18757413-00601005.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

11

Helmersen, Sondre Torp. "The Application of Teachings by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea." Journal of International Dispute Settlement 11, no. 1 (January 24, 2020): 20–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/idz024.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract Scholars have examined the role of ‘teachings’ (or ‘literature’, ‘doctrine’ or ‘scholarship’) in various international courts and tribunals, but never the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS). This article analyses the general weight ITLOS judges assign to teachings, how the judges distinguish between more and less significant teachings, and how and why different judges use teachings differently. ITLOS judges generally seem to assign teachings low weight, albeit with some exceptions. Some teachings are seen as more important, on the basis of their quality and on the fact that multiple writers agree. Judges treat teachings somewhat differently, with Judge Laing being a significant outlier, responsible for roughly half of all citations.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

12

Rosenne, Shabtai. "International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: 1996-97 Survey." International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 13, no. 4 (1998): 487–514. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157180898x00328.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThis article surveys the work of the Meeting of States Parties, of the United Nations General Assembly, and of ITLOS, from the third Meeting of States Parties held in November 1995 through 1996 and 1997. The Meeting of States Parties dealing with the Tribunal's financial and administrative matters is noted. The results of the election of members of ITLOS held in August 1996 and the geographical representation in the Tribunal are explained. An account of different actions taken by the United Nations General Assembly relating to ITLOS during the period under review follows. The Tribunal's activities relating to its own internal organisation, the Tribunal's jurisdiction, and the first case submitted to it, conclude this survey.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

13

Martín, José Manuel Cortés. "Prior Consultations and Jurisdiction at ITLOS." Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 13, no. 1 (April 16, 2014): 1–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718034-12341268.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

14

RUYS, TOM, and ANEMOON SOETE. "‘Creeping’ Advisory Jurisdiction of International Courts and Tribunals? The case of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea." Leiden Journal of International Law 29, no. 1 (December 17, 2015): 155–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156515000692.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractOn 2 April 2015, the full International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) rendered its first advisory opinion in reply to a request of the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission regarding illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing. Unlike any other court or tribunal with advisory competence, including the Seabed Disputes Chamber, ITLOS’ advisory jurisdiction is not explicitly enshrined in its constituent instrument, but was rather asserted in the Tribunal’s, homemade, rules of procedure. In spite of strong objections from various states, ITLOS affirmed a broad advisory jurisdiction ratione materiae and personae, and found that there were no compelling reasons to exercise its discretionary power to dismiss the request. The request and the Tribunal's handling thereof raise interesting questions regarding the opportunities and risks inherent to, and the outer limits of, the advisory jurisdiction of international courts and tribunals. This contribution takes a look at the advisory jurisdiction of the full Tribunal, having regard to the experiences of other international courts and tribunals.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

15

Kwiatkowska, Barbara. "The Southern Bluefin Tuna (New Zealand v Japan; Australia v Japan) Cases." International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 15, no. 1 (2000): 1–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157180800x00019.

Full text

Abstract:

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.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

16

Caminos, Hugo. "The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: An Overview of its Jurisdictional Procedure." Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 5, no. 1 (2006): 13–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157180306777156808.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThe UN Convention on the Law of the Sea established the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea as one of the compulsory procedures to be chosen by States for the settlement of their disputes arising out of the interpretation and application of the Convention. ITLOS became operational on 1 October 1996. As a specialized judicial forum, the jurisdiction of ITLOS is limited to matters related to the Law of the Sea. On the other hand it is open to entities other than States, "which contributes to the Tribunal's comprehensive character. The Tribunal's decisions […] are final and are required to be complied with by all the parties to the disputes. Thus except in relation to its jurisdiction, […] in other respects the Tribunal enjoys a standing comparable to the ICJ". The jurisdiction in personam of ITLOS is a remarkable innovation. The author gives an overview of the jurisdictional procedure of the Tribunal in this article.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

17

LANDO, MASSIMO. "The Advisory Jurisdiction of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: Comments on the Request for an Advisory Opinion Submitted by the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission." Leiden Journal of International Law 29, no. 2 (April 29, 2016): 441–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156516000091.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractIn the Request for an Advisory Opinion Submitted by the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) was called upon to clarify the existence of its advisory jurisdiction as a full Tribunal under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). ITLOS unanimously upheld its advisory jurisdiction, yet its reasoning is not convincing. ITLOS’s interpretation of Article 21 of its Statute appears unpersuasive. The article discusses the interpretation of Article 21 ITLOS Statute pursuant to the rules on interpretation of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (Arts. 31–33). First, the article addresses the article's textual reading, and criticizes the Tribunal's interpretation of the term ‘matters’. Second, the article considers the interpretation of Article 21 according to the subsequent practice of the parties, argued by some states but not addressed by ITLOS. Third, the travaux préparatoires of the UNCLOS are examined, with a view to understanding whether the drafters intended the Tribunal to have advisory jurisdiction. Fourth, the six authentic texts of UNCLOS are compared in order to highlight potential differences that may help understand the exact meaning of the provision. Fifth, the article discusses the relationship between advisory jurisdiction and state consent. The conclusion is that the basis for ITLOS's advisory jurisdiction under UNCLOS seems weak. Some general considerations conclude the article, together with a possible solution that takes stock of ITLOS's decision.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

18

Churchill, Robin. "Dispute Settlement in the Law of the Sea: Survey for 2013." International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 30, no. 1 (February 17, 2015): 1–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718085-12341337.

Full text

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 2013 were the delivery of a judgment by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (itlos) finding that it lacked jurisdiction in the Louisa case; an order of provisional measures by the itlos in the Arctic Sunrise case; and the initiation of a record 10 new cases. These and other developments are reviewed in detail.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

19

Rieter, Eva. "The “Arctic Sunrise” Case (Netherlands/Russia) (ITLOS)." International Legal Materials 53, no. 4 (August 2014): 603–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.5305/intelegamate.53.4.0603.

Full text

Abstract:

In September 2013, officials of the Russian Federation boarded the vessel Arctic Sunrise, an icebreaker flying the flag of the Netherlands. The vessel, operated by Greenpeace International, was present in the Russian Federation’s Exclusive Economic Zone in order to protest against the operation of the offshore fixed oil platform Prirazlomnaya. Russian authorities detained the Arctic Sunrise itself and all persons on board the vessel, initially based on an accusation of piracy.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

20

Gao, Jianjun. "The ITLOS Advisory Opinion for the SRFC." Chinese Journal of International Law 14, no. 4 (November 11, 2015): 735–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/chinesejil/jmv046.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

21

Shah, Riddhi. "Bangladesh–Myanmar ITLOS Verdict: Precedence for India?" Strategic Analysis 37, no. 2 (March 2013): 178–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09700161.2012.755782.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

22

Gavouneli, Maria. "Request for an Advisory Opinion Submitted by the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission (SRFC) (ITLOS)." International Legal Materials 54, no. 5 (October 2015): 890–926. http://dx.doi.org/10.5305/intelegamate.54.5.0890.

Full text

Abstract:

On April 2, 2015, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) rendered its first ever advisory opinion by the full Tribunal in response to a request for an advisory opinion submitted by the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission (SRFC), a regional fisheries organization comprised of seven West-African States. The Tribunal was asked to address four substantive questions relating to the obligations of the flag and coastal states regarding fisheries management and the ensuing responsibility of both states and competent organizations for illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing. In doing so, it also had occasion to clarify whether ITLOS indeed has plenary advisory jurisdiction.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

23

DE HERDT, SANDRINE W., and TAFSIR MALICK NDIAYE. "The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the Protection and Preservation of the Marine Environment: Taking Stock and Prospects." Canadian Yearbook of international Law/Annuaire canadien de droit international 57 (November 2020): 353–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cyl.2020.23.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThis article takes stock of the contribution of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) to the development of international environmental law. It examines in this regard the jurisdiction of the tribunal and provides an overview of its environmental jurisprudence. It then assesses the potential role of ITLOS in relation to some marine environmental challenges ahead. In particular, it considers the possibility of a request for an advisory opinion on climate change, the settlement of disputes regarding deep seabed mining, and the potential role of the tribunal under a new legal instrument on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

24

Rashbrooke, Gwenaele. "The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: A Forum for the Development of Principles of International Environmental Law?" International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 19, no. 4 (2004): 515–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1571808053310107.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThis article examines the role of the ITLOS established by the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention. It considers the extent to which principles of international environmental law are reflected in the 1982 Convention. It then reviews the relevant jurisprudence of the tribunal including the Southern Blue-fin Tuna case between Japan and Australia and New Zealand, the MOX case between Ireland and the UK, and the Land Reclamation case between Malaysia and Singapore to determine the extent that the ITLOS case-law has indeed contributed to the development of certain key principles of international environmental law, including Stockholm Principle 21/Rio Principle 2, the principle of preventative action, cooperation and precaution.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

25

Lowe, Vaughan, and Robin Churchill. "The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: Survey for 2001." International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 17, no. 4 (2002): 463–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157180802x00189.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

26

Churchill, Robin. "Dispute Settlement in the Law of the Sea: Survey for 2012." International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 28, no. 4 (2013): 563–614. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718085-12341293.

Full text

Abstract:

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.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

27

Churchill, Robin. "The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: Survey for 2003." International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 19, no. 4 (2004): 369–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1571808053310099.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThis instalment of the Survey considers the order for provisional measures made in the Land Reclamation case, and notes administrative and organizational developments within the ITLOS during the year 2003.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

28

Lowe, Vaughan. "The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: Survey for 2000." International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 16, no. 4 (2001): 549–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157180801x00225.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThis instalment of the Survey considers the decisions in the Camoarco and Monte Confurco cases, the submission of the Swordfish (Chile/European Community) case to the ITLOS, and administrative developments within the Tribunal during the year 2000.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

29

Balaram, Ravi A. "Case Study: The Myanmar and Bangladesh Maritime Boundary Dispute in the Bay of Bengal and Its Implications for South China Sea Claims." Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs 31, no. 3 (September 2012): 85–104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/186810341203100304.

Full text

Abstract:

This paper seeks to review the pertinent Myanmar and Bangladesh history in overlapping maritime territorial claims leading up to the September 2011 International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) case: Dispute Concerning Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary Between Bangladesh and Myanmar in the Bay of Bengal. It will dissect the legal proceedings as primary source documents and apply the relevant judgement findings to analyse the implications for the respective countries and for South China Sea maritime boundary disputes. While the judgements of this case set certain legal precedents that may be more easily applied to bilateral disputes, the implications, nevertheless, impinge on multilateral claims as well. To the extent that the Bangladesh-Myanmar ITLOS judgement provides a pathway to third-party, independent, and peaceful resolution to the potentially explosive and escalating tensions in the South China Sea, this paper argues that findings are relevant, but limited.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

30

Seok-Yong Lee. "ITLOS Approach to Marine Environmental Protectionand the Reclamation Case." 과학기술법연구 15, no. 2 (December 2009): 263–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.32430/ilst.2009.15.2.263.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

31

Tanaka, Yoshifumi. "Provisional Measures Prescribed by ITLOS and Marine Environmental Protection." Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting 108 (2014): 365–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.5305/procannmeetasil.108.0365.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

32

Gautier, Philippe. "Experts before ITLOS: An Overview of the Tribunal’s Practice." Journal of International Dispute Settlement 9, no. 3 (April 27, 2018): 433–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/idy016.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

33

Collins, Richard. "The M/V “Norstar” Case (Panama v. Italy) (ITLOS)." International Legal Materials 58, no. 4 (August 2019): 673–737. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ilm.2019.30.

Full text

Abstract:

On April 10, 2019, the International Tribunal of the Sea (ITLOS) gave judgment in the M/V “Norstar” (Panama v. Italy) case. This was the first time an international tribunal had ruled directly on the principle of freedom of navigation in international waters. Specifically, ITLOS found (by fifteen votes to seven) that by arresting and detaining the Panamanian-flagged M/V “Norstar”, Italy had violated Article 87(1) of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). In doing so, the Tribunal arguably relied on a quite expansive understanding of the exclusive flag state jurisdiction principle as set out in Article 92 UNCLOS—a point that was argued forcefully in a seven-judge dissenting opinion. Below, I will briefly outline the background to the case before setting out the central aspects of the judgment and considering further this point of contention surrounding the permissibility of nonflag prescriptive measures in international waters.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

34

de La Fayette, L. "ITLOS and the Saga of the Saiga: Peaceful Settlement." International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 15, no. 3 (August 1, 2000): 355–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718080020492805.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

35

Oxman, Bernard H., and Vincent P. Bantz. "The “Camouco” (Panamav. France) (Judgment). ITLOS Case No. 5." American Journal of International Law 94, no. 4 (October 2000): 713–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2589798.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

36

FORSTER, MALCOLM J. C. "The Mox Plant Case–Provisional Measures in the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea." Leiden Journal of International Law 16, no. 3 (September 2003): 611–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156503001316.

Full text

Abstract:

On 3 December 2001, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) issued an Order in response to Ireland's request for the prescription of provisional measures in accordance with Article 290 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). In its request, Ireland alleged violation by the United Kingdom of numerous provisions of UNCLOS. The scope of provisional measures requested by Ireland included, among others, the immediate suspension by the United Kingdom of the authorization of the Sellafield Mox Plant and a guarantee of no movement of radioactive substances or materials or wastes that are in any way related to the plant into or out of the waters of the Irish Sea. This article reviews the background to the dispute between Ireland and the United Kingdom over the operation of the Sellafield Mox Plant. It focuses on the various jurisdictional challenges raised before ITLOS and critically assesses the conclusions reached by the Tribunal in its Order.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

37

Pratap, Ravindra. "Provisional Measures in the “Enrica Lexie” Case." Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 16, no. 3 (February 27, 2017): 413–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718034-12341359.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract “Enrica Lexie” is yet another landmark case under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (unclos). The provisional measures prescribed by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (itlos) and the Annex vii Arbitral Tribunal share a discernibly significant commonality of result, if not a demonstrably identical approach to the issues contested between the flag state and the coastal state. There was no express finding by itlos on urgency other than in terms of prejudice to the rights of the parties. Whether the Arbitral Tribunal’s Order preserved the parties’ rights would depend in no small measure upon the nature and effectiveness of its decision on the merits. Perhaps the most important common legal development is the appreciation of human rights considerations. While their application might remain a matter of contestation, it would be difficult to characterize the Orders as unfair both for provisional measures as a temporary remedy and for their perceived bearings on the merits of the case.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

38

Boyle, Alan E. "Dispute Settlement and the Law of the Sea Convention: Problems of Fragmentation and Jurisdiction." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 46, no. 1 (January 1997): 37–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020589300060103.

Full text

Abstract:

The entry into force of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (“UNCLOS”), on 16 November 1994, is probably the most important development in the settlement of international disputes since the adoption of the UN Charter and the Statute of the International Court of Justice. Not only does the Convention create a new international court, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (“ITLOS”), it also makes extensive provision for compulsory dispute-settlement procedures involving States, the International Seabed Authority (“ISBA”), seabed mining contractors and, potentially, a range of other entities. Implementation of the Convention has spawned a number of inter-State disputes to add to the cases already before the International Court. The initiation of the ITLOS not only opens up new possibilities for settling these disputes but it also has implications for the future role of the International Court and ad hoc arbitration in the law of the sea and more generally. It contributes to the proliferation of international tribunals and adds to the potential for fragmentation both of the substantive law and of the procedures available for settling disputes. Judges Oda and Guillaume have argued that the ITLOS is a futile institution, that the UNCLOS negotiators were misguided in depriving the International Court of its central role in ocean disputes and that creation of a specialised tribunal may destroy the unity of international law. The law of the sea, both judges argue, is an essential part of international law and any dispute concerning the application and interpretation of that law should be seen as subject to settlement by the International Court.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

39

Churchill, Robin. "Dispute Settlement in the Law of the Sea: Survey for 2011." International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 27, no. 3 (2012): 517–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718085-12341236.

Full text

Abstract:

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 2011 were: the delivery by the Sea-Bed Disputes Chamber of its advisory opinion on Responsibilities and Obligations of States sponsoring Persons and Entities with respect to Activities in the Area; the referral of a new case to the International Tribunal for Law of the Sea (ITLOS) relating to the arrest and detention of a bunkering vessel in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) (the Virginia G case); the International Court of Justice’s judgments rejecting the requests of Costa Rica and Honduras to intervene in the Nicaragua/Colombia maritime boundary delimitation case; the decision of the arbitral tribunal in the Mauritius/United Kingdom case to reject a challenge to the appointment of one of the arbitrators; the activation of the Croatia/Slovenia arbitration agreement; and the fifth triennial election of ITLOS judges.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

40

Seok-Yong Lee. "ITLOS Decision on the Bay of Bengal Maritime Delimitation Case." kangwon Law Review 39, no. ll (June 2013): 279–311. http://dx.doi.org/10.18215/kwlr.2013.39..279.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

41

Cogliati-Bantz, Vincent. "The M/V “Virginia G” Case (Panama/Guinea-Bissau) (ITLOS)." International Legal Materials 53, no. 6 (December 2014): 1161–226. http://dx.doi.org/10.5305/intelegamate.53.6.1161.

Full text

Abstract:

On April 14, 2014, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (the Tribunal) rendered its Judgment in the case of the M/V Virginia G.. The judgment notably clarifies the scope of the sovereign rights of a coastal state with respect to living resources in its exclusive economic zone (EEZ).

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

42

Lowe, Vaughan. "Advocating Judicial Activism: The ITLOS Opinions of Judge Ivan Shearer." Australian Year Book of International Law Online 24, no. 1 (2005): 145–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/26660229-024-01-900000011.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

43

Leggett, Kristina. "The Southern Bluefin Tuna Cases: ITLOS Order on Provisional Measures." Review of European Community & International Environmental Law 9, no. 1 (April 2000): 76–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9388.00235.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

44

McDorman, Ted L. "3. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS)." Yearbook of International Environmental Law 21, no. 1 (January 1, 2010): 531–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/yiel/yvs058.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

45

García-Revillo, Miguel G. "3. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS)." Yearbook of International Environmental Law 22, no. 1 (January 1, 2011): 582–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/yiel/yvs127.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

46

García-Revillo, Miguel G. "3. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS)." Yearbook of International Environmental Law 23, no. 1 (January 1, 2012): 525–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/yiel/yvt053.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

47

Garcia-Revillo, M. G. "3. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS)." Yearbook of International Environmental Law 24, no. 1 (January 1, 2014): 534–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/yiel/yvu047.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

48

García-Revillo, Miguel G. "3. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS)." Yearbook of International Environmental Law 25, no. 1 (2014): 515–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/yiel/yvv045.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

49

García-Revillo, Miguel G. "3. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS)." Yearbook of International Environmental Law 26 (2015): 529–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/yiel/yvw055.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

50

García-Revillo, Miguel G. "3. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS)." Yearbook of International Environmental Law 27 (January 1, 2016): 424–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/yiel/yvx077.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

We offer discounts on all premium plans for authors whose works are included in thematic literature selections. Contact us to get a unique promo code!