Source: https://site.uit.no/nclos/
Timestamp: 2020-02-29 08:03:26
Document Index: 24629255

Matched Legal Cases: ['CJEU ', 'CJEU ', 'CJEU ', 'Art. 259', 'CJEU ', 'CJEU ']

The NCLOS Blog | The blog of the Norwegian Centre for the Law of the Sea
The Application of Teachings by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
Posted on 26/02/2020 by map000
By: Sondre Torp Helmersen
PDF Version: S T Helmersen Blog post
Matter commented on: teachings by the ITLOS
This blog post is based on an article in (2020) 11 Journal of International Dispute Settlement p. 20-46, which can be accessed through the following link: https://academic.oup.com/jids/article-abstract/11/1/20/5715401
How international judges use academic texts is a topic that attracts a small but steady degree of attention from the international legal academy. This blog post and the related article look at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), an institution that has not yet been the subject of such analysis.
This blog post and the related article focus on the role of teachings in answering specific legal questions that come before an international tribunal. Teachings also have other functions in international law. They help systematise the law and can present broader criticisms and reflections on the law’s history and future development. Examining these functions of teachings would require a methodology different from the one used here.
Posted in International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, Sources of international law	| Leave a comment
CJEU judgement on Slovenia v Croatia: What role for international law in EU-accession dispute settlement?
Posted on 18/02/2020 by map000
By: Thomas Bickl
PDF Version:Bickl II CJEU SLO CRO
Matter commented on: CJEU judgement on jurisdiction Case Art. 259 TFEU Republic of Slovenia v Republic of Croatia (C-457/18), 31 January 2020
With regard to the Case under examination here, the Republic of Slovenia brought infringement proceedings against the Republic of Croatia under Article 259 TFEU before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on 13 July 2018 (C-457/18). In short, Slovenia claimed that Croatia violates its obligations to respect EU law by refusing to implement the arbitration award on the maritime and land border between Croatia and Slovenia issued on 29 June 2017. To that end, an Arbitration Agreement between the Republic of Croatia and the Republic of Slovenia had been concluded on 04 November 2009 in the course of Croatia’s EU accession negotiations following a blockade of the Republic of Slovenia on the grounds that documents submitted by the Republic of Croatia during the negotiations prejudiced the definition of the disputed common State border.
Posted in CJEU, Law of the Sea Convention	| Leave a comment
A book review of Emerging Legal Orders in the Arctic: The Role of Non-Arctic Actors
Posted on 12/02/2020 by map000
By: Jan Jakub Solski*
PDF version: NCLOS Blog Jan Solski Blog book review
Matter commented on: Emerging Legal Orders in the Arctic: The Role of Non-Arctic Actors
Akiho Shibata, Leilei Zou, Nikolas Sellheim and Marzia Scopelliti (eds)
(2019) Informa Law from Routledge, h/b,
ISBN: 978-1-138-61851, pp 286, £115.
*The review will be published in the forthcoming issue of Journal of International Maritime Law vol 25 (2019) Issue 5, published by Lawtext Publishing Ltd www.lawtext.com
This most interesting book is a collection of contributions by a geographically diverse group of legal and political science experts, reflecting on the recent developments in the legal regime of the Arctic and taking a specific interest in non-Arctic actors. It responds to an observation that there is a remarkable change all over the world, particularly felt and visible in the Arctic (p 1). Climate change, globalisation and shifts in power, such as the shift in relative political and economic power from the West to the East, as well as the recognition for the increasing role of non-state actors in international law, all provide the rationale for the book and its focus. Continue reading →
The Advocate General’s Opinion on Slovenia v Croatia: A proper reflection of international law and the EU’s role in the Arbitration Agreement?
Posted on 07/01/2020 by map000
PDF Version: Bickl AG CJEU SLO CRO
Matter commented on: Advocate General Opinion Case Republic of Slovenia v Republic of Croatia (C-457/18), 11 December 2019
The Republic of Slovenia brought infringement proceedings against the Republic of Croatia under Article 259 TFEU before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on 13 July 2018 (C-457/18). Slovenia claims that Croatia violates its obligations to respect EU law by refusing to implement the arbitration award on the maritime and land border between Croatia and Slovenia issued on 29 June 2017. Continue reading →
Dispute Settlement in the New Treaty on Marine Biodiversity in Areas beyond National Jurisdiction
Posted on 23/12/2019 by map000
By: Joanna Mossop*
PDF Version:J Mossop Dispute Settlement in the BBNJ Treaty NCLOS
Matter commented on: Dispute settlement provisions in BBNJ
In December 2017, the United Nations General Assembly authorised the commencement of negotiations for a new treaty on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ Treaty). The new treaty is to be the third implementing agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). At the time of writing, three sessions of the intergovernmental conference have been held and two draft texts issued by the President of the Conference, Ambassador Rena Lee (see here and here). The purpose of this comment is to reflect on the future of the dispute settlement provisions in the new Agreement. I will focus on the provisions that appeared in the first draft text and were unchanged in the second draft text. These provisions essentially provided for the application of Part XV of UNCLOS mutatis mutandis (with the necessary changes) to disputes about the interpretation and application of the BBNJ Treaty.
Posted in Biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ), Dispute settlement, Marine biodiversity	| Leave a comment
Posted on 11/12/2019 by map000
PDF version: Blog_NBankes_Article6 (GZ DW edit)(NB)
Document Commented On: Resolution LP.5(14) on the Provisional Application of the 2009 Amendment to Article 6 of the London Protocol, adopted 11 October 2019, by the 14th Meeting of the Contracting Parties to the 1996 Protocol to the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and other Matters. [Note: Documents relating to the London Convention and Protocol including this document may be accessed on the website of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) here but users have to create an account to obtain access. Follow “Meeting Documents” and then LC Documents (Session 41). For convenience, the text of the Resolution is included at the foot of this post].
This post examines the recent decision of the Contracting Parties to the 1996 Protocol (the London Protocol or LP) to the London Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and other Matters (London Dumping Convention or LC) to agree to the provisional application of an amendment to Article 6 of the LP. That amendment (originally adopted in 2009) when it enters into force will allow the export of CO2 for geological sequestration. The amendment is a crucial piece of the puzzle to permit collaborative projects for the subsea disposal of captured carbon dioxide emissions from industrial facilities located elsewhere than the coastal State responsible for the disposal site. This initiative, which will permit provisional application of that amendment, will help facilitate projects such as the Equinor-led Northern Lights Project on the Norwegian continental shelf. That project is currently drilling a test well: see here and here.
Posted in Law of the Sea Convention, London Dumping Convention, London Protocol	| Leave a comment
Posted on 20/11/2019 by map000
By: Nicholas A. Ioannides
Pdf version: NCLOS Blog 20.11.2019 Ioannides Palestine maritime claims
Matter commented on: Declaration of the State of Palestine regarding its Maritime Boundaries in accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, September 24, 2019
Introduction On 24 September 2019, the State of Palestine transmitted to the United Nations a Declaration whereby it promulgates its maritime assertions under the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (‘LOSC’) including tables of coordinates and a map depicting its claimed maritime area. It is worth recalling that following its accession to the LOSC the State of Palestine sent a similar declaration to the UN in 2015, albeit without coordinates and map. Notably, a short while ago an article outlined Palestine’s strategy aiming at both promoting and safeguarding the latter’s rights over the sea waters adjacent to Gaza. This post comments on the latest Declaration by the State of Palestine and highlights certain noteworthy aspects of it.
Posted in Eastern Mediterranean Sea, Maritime delimitation, Territorial Sea Delimitation	| Leave a comment
Posted on 12/11/2019 by map000
The Norwegian Centre of the Law of the Sea research activity has started and this blog aims to become a new breeding ground of ideas for the passionate of the law of the sea, ocean governance and all related topics.
I am inspired, humbled and honoured to take up the baton from Nigel Bankes and be the blog editor of this new season. In this blog, we want to share ideas, news and best practices about laws and oceans, and develop stronger connections with the ocean-based research community.
You will be exposed to our views ocean law and governance-related topics. You are more than welcome to respond, add comments and suggestions, disagree and express dissenting opinions. I ask to keep the comments relevant to the conversations taking place here so that we can always be kind and respectful to all those involved and add value and depth to the dialogue in a constructive manner.
Young scholars (in age and spirit), PhD students and LLM students that are willing to publish their Master thesis’ findings, are especially encouraged to contact us: this blog is meant to be a platform to develop your creative research and writing skills as young explorers! I encourage you to visit the NCLOS website and learn about us, about our current and future research areas, about who we are and our core values.
It will be my task to receive your contributions (short opinion pieces as well as more in-depth analyses that draw attention to your field of expertise), news, interesting events, book reviews and reading suggestions. Please feel free to contact me for more information and consider subscribing and engaging in discussion around the notion of ocean governance, which I believe is central for a better common future in research.
Thank you for reading and visiting, and helping us build a vibrant research community focused on observations, research and exchange of views around our wonderful oceans.
Margherita Paola Poto,
Forsker, NCLOS UiT, Tromsø
Email contact: margherita.p.poto@uit.no
PDF version: http://site.uit.no/jclos/files/2019/07/JCLOS-Blog-8.7.2019-Settlement-of-the-Dispute-concerning-the-Arctic-Sunrise_Elferink.pdf
Document commented upon: Joint statement of the Russian Federation and the Kingdom of the Netherlands on scientific cooperation in the Russian Arctic region and the settlement of a dispute (Joint statement)
In the fall of 2013, the detention of the vessel Arctic Sunrise and its crew by Russian security forces was breaking news. The detention followed a protest action of Greenpeace activists against the rig Prirazlomnaia, which planned to begin the commercial production of oil in the Pechora Sea in the exclusive economic zone of the Russian Federation. The Russian Federation accused the activists of engaging among others in piracy and hooliganism. The activists faced criminal charges entailing long-term prison terms. The detention of the vessel and its crew prompted the Netherlands, the flag State of the Arctic Sunrise, to start arbitral proceedings against the Russian Federation under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Convention), to which both States are parties. The Russian Federation immediately rejected that the arbitral tribunal had the jurisdiction to deal with this dispute and abstained from participating in the proceedings. However, the non-participation of the Russian Federation did not stop the arbitral procedure. Prior to the constitution of the arbitral tribunal, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), in an order indicating provisional measures to protect the rights of the Netherlands, had already ordered the Russian Federation to release the Arctic Sunrise and its crew. Although the Russian Federation did not comply with the order of the ITLOS, it did release the crew of the Arctic Sunrise as part of an amnesty in connection with the 20th anniversary of the Russian constitution in December 2013. The bill introduced in the State Duma was amended at the last moment to include the charges that had been brought against the crew members. This probably did much to defuse media attention for the Arctic Sunrise incident in the Western press. The Arctic Sunrise itself was eventually allowed to leave the Russian port of Murmansk in June of 2014. Continue reading →
This post analyses the doctrinal contributions of the “Norstar” Judgement to both freedom of navigation (Article 87(1)(a) of UNCLOS) and exclusive flag state jurisdiction (Article 92(1) of UNCLOS). The post concludes with a brief discussion as to if and why the Tribunal may wish to clarify its position on these issues in any forthcoming M/T “San Padre Pio” Case (Switzerland v. Nigeria), Order. Continue reading →
Posted in Article 87, Article 92, Jurisdiction, Law of the Sea Convention, Treaty Interpretation	| 1 Comment
Categories Select Category Adjacent coast Allocation Antarctic Arbitration Archipelagic waters Arctic Arctic Council Arctic Fisheries Arctic Five Areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ) Article 234 Article 87 Article 92 Artisanal fishing Bays Biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ) Bonn (CMS) Convention Canada Central Arctic Ocean Cetacean culture Cetaceans China CJEU Climate change Climate refugee coastal states Conciliation Continental shelf Countermeasures Declaration on Central Arctic Ocean Fisheries Delimitation Disappearing States Dispute settlement Disputed areas Due Diligence Due Regard Eastern Mediterranean Sea EEA Law enforcement Entitlement Environment Equity European Union Exclusive ecnomic zone Fisheries Flag state responsibility flag states freedom of expression Good faith Hot pursuit human rights law Hydrocarbons ICJ Optional Declaration Implementing agreements innocent passage Installations Integrated resource management Interim Measures International Fisheries Law International Law Association International Maritime Organisation International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea Islands Joint development zone Jurisdiction Law enforcement Law of the Sea Convention Litigation London Dumping Convention London Protocol Marine biodiversity Marine biological diversity Marine living resources Marine Protected Areas Maritime delimitation Maritime delimitation migratory species Netherlands Northern Sea Route Norway Norwegian Fisheries Law Oil and gas Opposite coast Philippines pilotage Plastics Polar Code Port state jurisdiction prior notification Provisional measures Regional Fisheries Management Organizations Review Panel rights of nature Rocks Russia Russian Federation Safety Zones Sea level rise Shared fish stocks ship-source pollution Sources of international law South China Sea Special circumstances Spratly Islands SPRFMO State responsibility Statelessness Strategic environmental assessments (SEA) Svalbard Fisheries Protection Zone Svalbard Treaty Territorial sea Territorial Sea Delimitation Three-stage process Trade law Traditional Fishing Rights Treaty Interpretation Uncategorized UNICPOLOS unilateralism United Nations Environment Assembly United States Unjustifiable discrimination Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties warships wild animals WTO dispute settlement