The law of maritime boundary delimitation : : a case study of the Russian Federation / / Alex G. Oude Elferink.

• Superior document: Publications on Ocean Development
• VerfasserIn: Oude Elferink, Alex G., 1962-
• Place / Publishing House: Dordrecht, Netherlands ;, Boston, Massachusetts : : Martinus Nijhoff,, [1994]; ©1994
• Year of Publication: 1994
• Language: English
• Series: Publications on Ocean Development
• Physical Description: 1 online resource (480 pages)

Table of Contents

• Intro
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
• Table of Contents
• CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE OF INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS
• TABLE OF LEGISLATION
• TABLE OF CASES
• ABBREVIATIONS
• NOTE ON THE TRANSCRIPTION OF CYRILLIC
• INTRODUCTION
• INTRODUCTION
• 1. Objective and Outline of the Study
• 2. The Relationship of the Russian Federation and Other Former Soviet Republics to the Soviet Union
• PART 1 MARITIME DELIMITATION LAW
• INTRODUCTION
• CHAPTER I. State Practice concerning Maritime Delimitation
• 1. Introduction
• 2. Delimitation Provisions of the Geneva Conventions of 1958
• 2.1. The Continental Shelf
• 2.1.1. The ILC Debate
• 2.1.2. The Debate at UNCLOS I
• 2.1.3. Interpretation of Article 6 in the Light of its Drafting History
• 2.2. The Territorial Sea
• 3. The LOS Convention
• 3.1. The Continental Shelf and the EEZ
• 3.1.1. Negotiations on Articles 74(1) and 83(1)
• 3.1.2. Interpretation of Articles 74(1) and 83(1)
• 3.1.3. The Settlement of Delimitation Disputes
• 3.1.4. Interim Measures Pending Agreement
• 3.1.5. Islands and Maritime Zones
• 3.2. The Territorial Sea
• 4. Bilateral Delimitation Agreements
• 5. National Legislation
• CHAPTER II. The Case Law concerning Maritime Delimitation
• 1. Introduction
• 2. The North Sea Continental Shelf Cases
• 2.1. The Judgment
• 2.2. Evaluation
• 3. The Anglo-French Continental Shelf Arbitration
• 3.1. The Decision
• 3.2. Evaluation
• 4. The Beagle Channel Arbitration
• 5. The Jan Mayen Conciliation
• 6. The Tunisia/Libya Continental Shelf Case
• 6.1. The Judgment
• 6.2. Evaluation
• 7. The Gulf of Maine Case
• 7.1. The Judgment
• 7.2. Evaluation
• 8. The Guinea/Guinea-Bissau Maritime Delimitation Arbitration
• 8.1. The Award
• 8.2. Evaluation
• 9. The Libya/Malta Continental Shelf Case
• 9.1. The Judgment
• 9.2. Evaluation.
• 10. The Guinea-Bissau/Senegal Arbitration
• 11. The Canada/France Maritime Boundary Case
• 11.1. The Decision
• 11.2. Evaluation
• 12. The Jan Mayen Case
• 12.1. The Judgment
• 12.2. Evaluation
• CHAPTER III. Maritime Delimitation Law - An Appraisal
• 1. Introduction
• 2. State Practice and Maritime Delimitation Law
• 2.1. Multilateral Conventions
• 2.2. Bilateral Delimitation Agreements
• 3. The Case Law and Maritime Delimitation Law
• PART 2 THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION POSITION ON MARITIME DELIMITATION LAW
• INTRODUCTION
• CHAPTER IV. The Position of the Russian Federation on Maritime Delimitation Law
• 1. The Soviet Union's Position at UNCLOS I
• 2. The Soviet Union's Position at UNCLOS III
• 3. Legislation of the Russian Federation Establishing Limits of Maritime Zones
• 3.1. The Territorial Sea
• 3.2. The Continental Shelf
• 3.3. The Fishing Zone and Economic Zone
• CHAPTER V. Russian Legal Doctrine concerning Maritime Delimitation Law
• 1. Introduction
• 2. The Interpretation of Maritime Delimitation Law
• PART 3 THE MARITIME BOUNDARY DELIMITATIONS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
• INTRODUCTION
• CHAPTER VI. The Baltic Sea
• 1. Introduction
• 2. Estonia
• 2.1. The Estonian Position on the Delimitation of Maritime Boundaries
• 2.1.1. Maritime Boundary Issues
• 2.1.2. National Legislation Establishing Limits of Maritime Zones
• 2.2. The Delimitation of the Estonian-Russian Federation Maritime Boundary
• 3. Finland
• 3.1. The Finnish Position on the Delimitation of Maritime Boundaries
• 3.1.1. Maritime Boundary Issues
• 3.1.2. Position in Multilateral Negotiations
• 3.1.3. National Legislation Establishing Limits of Maritime Zones
• 3.2. Delimitation Agreements concerning the Maritime Boundaries of Finland with Estonia and the Russian Federation
• 4. Lithuania.
• 4.1. The Lithuanian Position on the Delimitation of Maritime Boundaries
• 4.1.1. Maritime Boundary Issues
• 4.1.2. National Legislation Establishing Limits of Maritime Zones
• 4.2. The Delimitation of the Lithuanian-Russian Federation Maritime Boundary
• 5. Poland
• 5.1. The Polish Position on the Delimitation of Maritime Boundaries
• 5.1.1. Maritime Boundary Issues
• 5.1.2. Position in Multilateral Negotiations
• 5.1.3. National Legislation Establishing Limits of Maritime Zones
• 5.2. The Delimitation of the Polish-Russian Federation Maritime Boundary
• 6. Sweden
• 6.1. The Swedish Position on the Delimitation of Maritime Boundaries
• 6.1.1. Maritime Boundary Issues
• 6.1.2. Position in Multilateral Negotiations
• 6.1.3. National Legislation Establishing Limits of Maritime Zones
• 6.2. The Agreements concerning the Maritime Boundary of Sweden with Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and the Russian Federation
• 6.2.1. Background
• 6.2.2. The Negotiations
• 6.2.3. The Legal Positions of Sweden and the Soviet Union
• 6.2.4. The 1988 Agreements
• 7. The Agreement on the Trijunction Point of the Maritime Boundaries of Poland, Sweden, and the Russian Federation
• CHAPTER VII. The Barents Sea, the Bering Sea, the Chukchi Sea, and the North Pacific Ocean
• 1. Introduction
• 2. Norway
• 2.1. The Norwegian Position on the Delimitation of Maritime Boundaries
• 2.1.1. Maritime Boundary Issues
• 2.1.2. Position in Multilateral Negotiations
• 2.1.3. National Legislation Establishing Limits of Maritime Zones
• 2.2. The Delimitation of the Norwegian-Russian Federation Maritime Boundary
• 2.2.1. Characteristics of the Barents Sea
• 2.2.2. Delimitation of the Sea Frontier in the Varanger Fjord
• 2.2.3. The Negotiations on the Maritime Boundary in the Barents Sea
• 2.2.4. The Legal Positions of Norway and the Russian Federation.
• 2.2.5. Provisional Arrangements
• 3. The United States
• 3.1. The United States Position on the Delimitation of Maritime Boundaries
• 3.1.1. Maritime Boundary Issues
• 3.1.2. Position in Multilateral Negotiations
• 3.1.3. National Legislation Establishing Limits of Maritime Zones
• 3.2. The Delimitation of the Russian Federation-United States Maritime Boundary
• 3.2.1. Characteristics of the Bering Sea, the Chukchi Sea and the North Pacific Ocean
• 3.2.2. Interpretation of the 1867 Convention on the Cession of Alaska
• 3.2.3. Developments Leading up to the Conclusion of the 1990 Maritime Boundary Agreement
• 3.2.4. The 1990 Maritime Boundary Agreement
• CHAPTER VIII. The Black Sea
• 1. Introduction
• 2. Georgia
• 2.1. The Georgian Position on the Delimitation of Maritime Boundaries
• 2.1.1. Maritime Boundary Issues
• 2.1.2. National Legislation Establishing Limits of Maritime Zones
• 2.2. The Delimitation of the Georgian-Russian Federation Maritime Boundary
• 3. Romania
• 3.1. The Romanian Position on the Delimitation of Maritime Boundaries
• 3.1.1. Maritime Boundary Issues
• 3.1.2. Position in Multilateral Negotiations
• 3.1.3. National Legislation Establishing Limits of Maritime Zones
• 3.2. The Delimitation of the Romanian-Ukrainian Maritime Boundary
• 4. Turkey
• 4.1. The Turkish Position on the Delimitation of Maritime Boundaries
• 4.1.1. Maritime Boundary Issues
• 4.1.2. Position in Multilateral Negotiations
• 4.1.3. National Legislation Establishing Limits of Maritime Zones
• 4.2. Delimitation Agreements concerning the Maritime Boundary of Turkey with Georgia, the Russian Federation and Ukraine
• 5. Ukraine
• 5.1. The Ukrainian Position on the Delimitation of Maritime Boundaries
• 5.1.1. Maritime Boundary Issues
• 5.1.2. Position on Maritime Delimitation Law.
• 5.1.3. National Legislation Establishing Limits of Maritime Zones
• 5.2. The Delimitation of Russian Federation-Ukrainian Maritime Boundary
• CHAPTER IX. The Sea of Japan, the Sea of Okhotsk and the Northwest Pacific Ocean
• 1. Introduction
• 2. Japan
• 2.1. The Japanese Position on the Delimitation of Maritime Boundaries
• 2.1.1. Maritime Boundary Issues
• 2.1.2. Position in Multilateral Negotiations
• 2.1.3. National Legislation Establishing Limits of Maritime Zones
• 2.2. The Delimitation of the Japanese-Russian Federation Maritime Boundary
• 3. North Korea
• 3.1. The North Korean Position on the Delimitation of Maritime Boundaries
• 3.1.1. Maritime Boundary Issues
• 3.1.2. Position in Multilateral Negotiations
• 3.1.3. National Legislation Establishing Limits of Maritime Zones
• 3.2. The Delimitation of the North Korean-Russian Federation Maritime Boundary
• PART 4 EVALUATION AND CONCLUSIONS
• CHAPTER X. State Practice of the Russian Federation and Maritime Delimitation Law
• 1. Introduction
• 2. Positions on Maritime Delimitation Law
• 2.1. The Position of the Russian Federation on Maritime Delimitation Law
• 2.2. The Position of Neighboring States on Maritime Delimitation Law and Their Interests in the Delimitation of Maritime Boundaries
• 3. The Maritime Boundary Delimitations of the Russian Federation
• 3.1. The Setting of the Negotiations on Maritime Boundaries of the Russian Federation
• 3.2. Negotiations between the Russian Federation and Neighboring States on Maritime Boundaries
• 3.2.1. Chronology of the Negotiations and Agreements
• 3.2.2. Evaluation of the Delimitation of the Maritime Boundaries of the Russian Federation in the Light of Maritime Delimitation Law
• 3.3. The Contents of Bilateral Delimitation Agreements of the Russian Federation.
• 4. The Interaction of State Practice and Law in the Field of Maritime Delimitation in the Light of the Case Study on the Russian Federation.