Medzinárodná delimitácia námorných zón (1969-2009)

• Authors: Viktor Vaculčík

Title variants

EN

The international delimitation of maritime zones (1969-2009)

• Languages of publication: SK

Abstracts

EN

This article explores the development of maritime delimitation between the breakthrough decisions of the International Court of the Justice in the North Sea Continental Shelf cases (1969) and the Maritime Delimitation in the Black Sea (2009). Being based on the Art.6 of the Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf (1958), the international jurisprudence rather quickly developed its own methodology which has made a long way from the simple assumption that the final delimitation must be always the equidistance line. On the other hand, whilst the equidistance line disappeared from the wording of the delimitation clauses incorporated in the later United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (1982), the delimitation line of the equidistance line survived in the later jurisprudence, being the starting point for all delimitations without limiting the international courts of a relevant adjustment because of the particular characteristics of every single case. The adoption of equitableness in the methodology of maritime delimitation seemed to be a perspective step forward in the late 1960’s. However, this progressive development went probably too fast to enable a full apprehension of the various possibilities of this new approach and came with its limitless application of equity into a dead-end in the decisions of the early 1980’s. Gradually, the later international jurisprudence in maritime delimitation has become more structured, respecting more the natural characteristics of each particular case. Finally, a structured framework of a methodological system appeared in the early years of the 21st century, enabling the courts a more common approach, whilst modifying the delimitation system regarding the particularities of each individual maritime delimitation case.

Keywords

EN

delimitation; equidistance line; relevant circumstances; disproportionality; equitable result

Discipline

• LAW_&_ADMINISTRATION: LAW & ADMINISTRATION

• Publisher: Institute of State and Law, Czech Academy of Sciences
• Journal: Právník. Teoretický časopis pro otázky státu a práva (The Lawyer - Scientific Review for Problems of State and Law)
• Year: 2022
• Volume: 161
• Issue: 10
• Pages: 990-1006
• Document type: ARTICLE

Contributors

author

Viktor Vaculčík

• Právník, redakce, Ústav státu a práva AV ČR, v.v.i., Národní 18, 116 00 Praha 1, Czech Republic