| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
098766
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The advisory function can be assessed as a fallback procedure at a time when there is a lack of cases before international courts and tribunals. Although not legally binding and having no precedential effect, Advisory Opinions are generally accepted. This paper looks into the question of the Advisory Opinions in the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) system. The advisory function of the Tribunal is exercised by the Seabed Disputes Chamber within the terms of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The first request for an advisory opinion was filed on 14 May 2010. The full Court may, however, render an advisory opinion based on other international agreements according to Article 138 of the Rules of the ITLOS. As a rule, the advisory procedure is open to international organizations only. There are neither claims nor parties involved in this procedure. The paper tries to address the legal regime relating to the Opinions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
184446
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
106871
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Degradation of the marine environment pushes the law of the sea to develop both substantial and procedural measures to safeguard marine environmental sustainability. Ill-planned and non-planned activities, land, sea or sea-bed based, become one of the main forces behind marine pollution. Environmental impact assessment (EIA), as an effective precautionary tool in evaluating and monitoring potential harm of planned activities, has been rapidly and widely integrated into both national and international legal regimes. However, the rudimentary and unelaborated EIA provisions in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea do not create an effective marine EIA procedure, which can be improved through a comparative study of relevant sources of international law on EIA.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
133953
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article recounts the negotiations and emergence of Article 234 concerning ice-covered areas in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. As Arctic shipping increases, more vessels and flag states may be subject to the provisions of Article 234, which permit coastal states to both prescribe and enforce special measures to protect the marine environment in ice-covered areas. The history of the Article 234, disclosed partially through declassified U.S. government documents, provides context for implementation of the provision by Arctic coastal states and flag states.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
092697
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
101600
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This paper gives an overview of the activities of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in 2009. It provides information on the 19th Meeting of States Parties (2009), organizational developments, the jurisdiction of the Tribunal and cases before it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
124284
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
History of the law of the sea is to a large extent the story of the development of freedom of the seas doctorine and the vicissitudes through wgich has it has passed through the centuries. For the last nearly 200 years, it has been accepted as an undisputed priciples, almost a dogma, which no one could dare challanges.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
107105
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2011.
|
| Description |
xvii, 316p.
|
| Series |
Cambridge studies in international and comparative law
|
| Standard Number |
9780521198172, hbk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 056190 | 341.45/HAR 056190 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
133954
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Regulation of international merchant shipping is predominantly carried out by global bodies, of which the International Maritime Organization (IMO) is the most prominent. The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea nevertheless explicitly or implicitly allows (limited) unilateral prescription by flag, coastal, and port states as well as the exercise of these rights collectively at the regional level. Some IMO instruments acknowledge the right to impose more stringent standards and others even encourage regional action. Moreover, while the mandate and practice of the IMO have expanded significantly since its establishment in 1958, further expansion is subject to constraints. This article explores various options for regional regulation of merchant shipping outside of the IMO. Special attention is given to such options in the Arctic region in the context of the efforts within the IMO regarding the adoption of the Mandatory Code for Ships Operating in Polar Waters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
133952
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
International courts and tribunals, governments, and scholars over the past half-century (many in the past two decades) have identified various provisions of the 1958 and 1982 treaties on the law of the sea that are customary international law and thus binding on all states, including those not party to these treaties. This article systematically collects these opinions and identifies provisions that have not yet attracted their attention
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|