Finland and sweden complete their maritime boundary in the baltic sea
In: Ocean development & international law, Band 27, Heft 3, S. 291-314
ISSN: 1521-0642
38 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Ocean development & international law, Band 27, Heft 3, S. 291-314
ISSN: 1521-0642
In: Verfassung und Recht in Übersee: VRÜ = World comparative law : WCL, Band 28, Heft 2, S. 247-248
ISSN: 0506-7286
In: Ocean development & international law, Band 23, Heft 2-3, S. 239-258
ISSN: 1521-0642
In: The international & comparative law quarterly: ICLQ, Band 41, Heft 2, S. 366-386
ISSN: 1471-6895
In: International journal of legal information: IJLI ; the official journal of the International Association of Law Libraries, Band 20, Heft 1, S. 18-23
ISSN: 2331-4117
The first feature that catches the eye when the Baltic is compared with other regions of the world is that the Baltic Sea area clearly distinguishes itself by the unusual combination of two elements. On the one hand, it is surrounded by nine countries adhering to different political as well as economic systems. On the other hand, apart from a relatively short segment south and southeast of the island of Bornholm between Denmark and Poland, a maritime boundary has been agreed upon in all other areas, at least if one disregards the trijunction points connecting these different lines. In the overwhelming majority of cases, moreover, a single maritime boundary has been established (continental shelf as well as fishery and economic zone). Some doubt may exist with respect to the German-Danish boundary, but the only real exception to this rule is the most southern stretch of the continental shelf delimitation line between Finland and Sweden (West and South of Bogskar), where the municipal legislation of both countries concerning the outer limits of their respective fishery zones corresponds neither inter se nor with respect to the continental shelf boundary. Negotiations on this topic have been initiated between the parties during the fall of 1989. As of today, these negotiations have not yet resulted in a new bilateral boundary agreement. It should also be noted that in all cases of adjacency the territorial sea has been delimited.
In: International & comparative law quarterly: ICLQ, Band 41, Heft 2, S. 366
ISSN: 0020-5893
In: Marine policy, Band 14, Heft 6, S. 484-490
ISSN: 0308-597X
In: Marine policy: the international journal of ocean affairs, Band 14, S. 484-490
ISSN: 0308-597X
In: Ocean development & international law, Band 19, Heft 2, S. 143-158
ISSN: 1521-0642
In: Marine policy, Band 11, Heft 2, S. 125-132
ISSN: 0308-597X
In: Marine policy: the international journal of ocean affairs, Band 11, S. 125-132
ISSN: 0308-597X
In: Revue belge de droit international: publication semestrielle de la Société Belge de Droit International = Belgian review of international law = Belgisch tijdschrift voor internationaal recht, Band 20, Heft 1, S. 41-71
ISSN: 0035-0788
In: American journal of international law, Band 93, Heft 1, S. 272-273
ISSN: 0002-9300
In: American journal of international law, Band 88, Heft 2, S. 405
ISSN: 0002-9300