The Other Australia / Japan Living Marine Resources Dispute : : Inferences on the Merits of the Southern Bluefin Tuna Arbitration in Light of the Whaling Case.

In 2000, the case brought by Australia and New Zealand against Japan's unilateral experimental fishing programme for southern bluefin tuna controversially failed to reach the merits for lack of the arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction. It was widely supposed that it would ultimately have failed any...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
VerfasserIn:
Place / Publishing House:[S.l.] : : Brill Academic Pub,, 2016.
Year of Publication:2016
Language:English
Series:Brill Research Perspectives.
Physical Description:1 online resource (vi, 91 pages) :; illustrations
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
LEADER 02493cam a2200457Ii 4500
001 993582530204498
005 20230808201254.0
006 m o d
007 cr cnu||||||||
008 161114s2016 xx o 000 0 eng d
020 |a 90-04-33945-0 
024 7 |a 10.1163/9789004339453  |2 DOI 
035 |a (CKB)3710000001009196 
035 |a (MiAaPQ)EBC5597592 
035 |a (OCoLC)962553010 
035 |a (nllekb)BRILL9789004339453 
035 |a (EXLCZ)993710000001009196 
040 |a NL-LeKB  |c NL-LeKB  |e rda 
043 |a a-ja---  |a e-au---  |a u-nz--- 
050 4 |a KZA1145  |b .O84 2016 
072 7 |a LBBK  |2 bicssc 
072 7 |a LAW066000  |2 bisacsh 
082 0 |a 343.07692  |2 23 
100 1 |a Serdy, Andrew,  |e author. 
245 0 4 |a The Other Australia / Japan Living Marine Resources Dispute :  |b Inferences on the Merits of the Southern Bluefin Tuna Arbitration in Light of the Whaling Case. 
264 1 |a [S.l.] :  |b Brill Academic Pub,  |c 2016. 
300 |a 1 online resource (vi, 91 pages) :  |b illustrations 
336 |a text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a computer  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a online resource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
490 0 |a Brill research perspectives 
504 |a Includes bibliographical references. 
520 |a In 2000, the case brought by Australia and New Zealand against Japan's unilateral experimental fishing programme for southern bluefin tuna controversially failed to reach the merits for lack of the arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction. It was widely supposed that it would ultimately have failed anyway because of international courts’ reluctance to consider scientific matters, the dispute's underlying cause being the parties' scientific disagreements regarding both the tuna stock itself and the nature and risks of the experiment. In 2014, however, the ICJ decided in Australia's favour the case against Japan's scientific whaling, based on flaws in the design of that experiment. Reviewing the tuna experiment's evolving design, the propositions it was to (dis)prove and the use Japan intended for that proof, Andrew Serdy suggests that similar factors were at play in both disputes and that a similar outcome of the tuna case, though not inevitable, would have been amply justified. 
650 0 |a Law of the sea. 
650 0 |a Marine resources  |z Japan. 
650 0 |a Marine resources  |z Australia. 
651 7 |a Australia. 
651 7 |a Japan. 
776 |z 90-04-33944-2 
720 |a Serdy, Andrew. 
830 0 |a Brill Research Perspectives. 
906 |a BOOK 
ADM |b 2023-08-10 04:44:21 Europe/Vienna  |f system  |c marc21  |a 2017-01-15 09:15:08 Europe/Vienna  |g false 
AVE |i Brill  |P EBA Brill All  |x https://eu02.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/uresolver/43ACC_OEAW/openurl?u.ignore_date_coverage=true&portfolio_pid=5343336010004498&Force_direct=true  |Z 5343336010004498  |b Available  |8 5343336010004498