The law of maritime boundary delimitation : : a case study of the Russian Federation / / Alex G. Oude Elferink.
Saved in:
Superior document: | Publications on Ocean Development |
---|---|
VerfasserIn: | |
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) |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
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.