NORTH SEA CONTINENTAL SHELF CASES光棍节英语
Judgment of 20 February 1969
The Court delivered judgment, by 11 votes to 6, in the North Sea Continental Shelf cas.
The dispute, which was submitted to the Court on 20 February 1967, related to the delimitation of the continental shelf between the Federal Republic of Germany and Denmark on the one hand, and between the Federal Republic of Germany and the Netherlands on the other. The Parties asked the Court to state the principles and rules of international law applicable, and undertook thereafter to carry out the delimitations on that basis.
The Court rejected the contention of Denmark and the Netherlands to the effect that the delimitations in question had to be carried out in accordance with the principle of equidistance as defined in Article 6 of the 1958 Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf, holding:
- that the Federal Republic, which had not ratified the Convention, was not legally bound by the provisions of Article 6;
- that the equidistance principle was not a necessary conquence of the general concept of continental shelf rights, and was not a rule of customary international law.
The Court also rejected the contentions of the Federal Republic in so far as the sought acceptance of the principle of an apportionment of the continental shelf into just and equitable shares. It held that each Party had an original right to tho areas of the continental shelf which constituted the natural prolongation of its land territory into and under the a. It was not a question of apportioning or sharing out tho areas, but of delimiting them.
七年级英语>everytime歌词measureThe Court found that the boundary lines in question were to be drawn by agreement between the Parties and in accordance with equitable principles, and it indicated certain factors to be taken into consideration for that purpo. It was now for the Parties to negotiate on the basis of such principles, as they have agreed to do.
oconnorThe proceedings, relating to the delimitation as between the Parties of the areas of the North Sea continental shelf appertaining to each of them, were instituted on 20 February 1967 by the communication to the Registry of the Court of two Special Agreements, between Denmark and the Federal Republic and the Federal Republic and the Netherlands respectively. By an Order of 26 April 1968, the Court joined the proceedings in the two cas.
intention
ppt淡雅图片The Court decided the two cas in a single Judgment, which it adopted by eleven votes to six. Amongst the Members of the Court concurring in the Judgment, Judge Sir Muhammad Zafrulla Khan appended a declaration; and President Bustamante y Rivero and Judges Jessup, Padilla Nervo and Ammoun appended parate opinions. In the ca of the non-concurring Judges, a declaration of his disnt was appended by Judge Bengzon; and Vice-President Koretsky, together with Judges Tanaka, Morelli and Lachs, and Judge ad hoc Sorenn, appended disnting opinions.
英文动画片大全
In its Judgment, the Court examined in the context of the delimitations concerned the pro
blems relating to the legal regime of the continental shelf raid by the contentions of the Parties.
The Facts and the Contentions of the Parties (paras. 1-17 of the Judgment)
The two Special Agreements had asked the Court to declare the principles and rules of international law applicable to the delimitation as between the Parties of the areas of the North Sea continental shelf appertaining to each of them beyond the partial boundaries in the immediate vicinity of the coast already determined between the Federal Republic and the Netherlands by an agreement of 1 December 1964 and between the Federal Republic and Denmark by an agreement of 9 June 1965.The Court was not asked actually to delimit the further boundaries involved, the Parties undertaking in their respective Special Agreements to effect such delimitation by agreement in pursuance of the Court's decision.
The waters of the North Sea were shallow, the whole abed, except for the Norwegian Trough, consisting of continental shelf at a depth of less than 200 metres. Most of it had a
lready been delimited between the coastal States concerned. The Federal Republic and Denmark and the Netherlands, respectively, had, however, been unable to agree on the prolongation of the partial boundaries referred to above, mainly becau Denmark and the Netherlands had wished this prolongation to be effected on the basis of the equidistance principle, whereas the Federal Republic had considered that it would unduly curtail what the Federal Republic believed should be its proper share of continental shelf area, on the basis of proportionality to the length of its North Sea coastline. Neither of the boundaries in question would by itlf produce this effect, but only both of them together - an element regarded by Denmark and the Netherlands as irrelevant to what they viewed as being two parate delimitations, to be carried out without reference to the other.
>okano
