Human rights and the environment: where next?
In: European journal of international law, Band 23, Heft 3, S. 613-642
ISSN: 0938-5428
30 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: European journal of international law, Band 23, Heft 3, S. 613-642
ISSN: 0938-5428
World Affairs Online
In: The international & comparative law quarterly: ICLQ, Band 46, Heft 1, S. 37-54
ISSN: 1471-6895
The entry into force of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea ("UNCLOS"), on 16 November 1994, is probably the most important development in the settlement of international disputes since the adoption of the UN Charter and the Statute of the International Court of Justice. Not only does the Convention create a new international court, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea ("ITLOS"), it also makes extensive provision for compulsory dispute-settlement procedures involving States, the International Seabed Authority ("ISBA"), seabed mining contractors and, potentially, a range of other entities. Implementation of the Convention has spawned a number of inter-State disputes to add to the cases already before the International Court. The initiation of the ITLOS not only opens up new possibilities for settling these disputes but it also has implications for the future role of the International Court and ad hoc arbitration in the law of the sea and more generally. It contributes to the proliferation of international tribunals and adds to the potential for fragmentation both of the substantive law and of the procedures available for settling disputes. Judges Oda and Guillaume have argued that the ITLOS is a futile institution, that the UNCLOS negotiators were misguided in depriving the International Court of its central role in ocean disputes and that creation of a specialised tribunal may destroy the unity of international law. The law of the sea, both judges argue, is an essential part of international law and any dispute concerning the application and interpretation of that law should be seen as subject to settlement by the International Court.
In: American journal of international law: AJIL, Band 89, Heft 4, S. 864-865
ISSN: 2161-7953
In: The international & comparative law quarterly: ICLQ, Band 41, Heft 3, S. 732-732
ISSN: 1471-6895
In: Marine policy, Band 16, Heft 2, S. 79-85
ISSN: 0308-597X
In: Marine policy, Band 16, Heft 1, S. 20-35
ISSN: 0308-597X
In: Marine policy: the international journal of ocean affairs, Band 16, S. 79-85
ISSN: 0308-597X
In: The international & comparative law quarterly: ICLQ, Band 40, Heft 1, S. 230-231
ISSN: 1471-6895
In: The international & comparative law quarterly: ICLQ, Band 39, Heft 3, S. 724-725
ISSN: 1471-6895
In: Marine policy, Band 14, Heft 2, S. 151-157
ISSN: 0308-597X
In: International & comparative law quarterly: ICLQ, Band 39, Heft 4, S. 940
ISSN: 0020-5893
In: The international & comparative law quarterly: ICLQ, Band 39, Heft 1, S. 1-26
ISSN: 1471-6895
In: Proceedings of the annual meeting / American Society of International Law, Band 82, S. 568-572
ISSN: 2169-1118
In: International affairs, Band 63, Heft 2, S. 364-365
ISSN: 1468-2346
In: The international & comparative law quarterly: ICLQ, Band 34, Heft 3, S. 637-638
ISSN: 1471-6895