Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
The Global Community Yearbook of International Law and Jurisprudence 2018$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Giuliana Ziccardi Capaldo

Print publication date: 2019

Print ISBN-13: 9780190072506

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: September 2019

DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780190072506.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 14 December 2019

Introductory Note

Introductory Note

The Jurisprudence of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in 2017

Chapter:
(p.421) II.1 Introductory Note
Source:
The Global Community Yearbook of International Law and Jurisprudence 2018
Author(s):

Tullio Treves

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/oso/9780190072506.003.0020

This Note focuses on the Judgment handed out by a special Chamber of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) in a dispute concerning delimitation of maritime areas between Ghana and Cote d’Ivoire. This is the only decision of substance of ITLOS during 2017. Among the elements of particular interests of the Judgment the following should be noted. First, the consideration and rejection of the argument that oil concession practice may constitute a tacit agreement. Second, the reliance, however limited to this case, as regards delimitation of the territorial sea on the same methodology used for the delimitation of the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf, namely, the equidistance/relevant circumstances methodology. Third, the distinction between the function of the Chamber in delimiting the continental shelf beyond 200 nm and that of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf in delineating the outer limits of the shelf. Fourth, the examination of the question of whether the Chamber had jurisdiction to decide on questions of responsibility, and of the applicability of customary international law thereto. Fifth, the statement that to adjudicate on the claim that Ghana had contravened the Chamber’s Order on provisional measures belonged to the Chamber’s “inherent competence”. Sixth, the analysis of the regime of contested areas in light of Article 83 of UNCLOS.

Keywords:   contested areas, continental shelf, delimitation, equidistance, non-compliance with provisional measures, oil concessions, state responsibility

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .