Search results

Filters

  • Journals
  • Keywords
  • Date
  • Type

Search results

Number of results: 2
items per page: 25 50 75
Sort by:

Abstract

There is a growing interest in new transportation routes that combine benefits of shorter distances, cost-effective transits and routes not troubled by maritime security concerns. The Northwest Passage offers a package of routes through the Canadian maritime zone; it is 9,000 km shorter than the Panama Canal route and 17,000 km shorter than the Cape Horn route. The Northern Sea Route shortens a Hamburg-Yokohama voyage by 4,800 miles, in comparison with the Suez Canal route. The transpolar route, if it materializes with an ice-free Central Arctic Ocean route, would shorten distances even further. Given the increase in regional and international navigation and shipping in the region, it is therefore not surprising that in recent years Arctic States and international bodies focused on the needs of enhanced safety and environmental standards for polar shipping. In addition to the dedicated domestic polar shipping regulation, primarily in Canada and the Russian Federation, the Arctic Council and International Maritime Organization (IMO) have launched important initiatives. The most important is establishing of international rules for ships operating in polar waters – The Polar Code.
Go to article

Abstract

The aim of the study is to examine the importance of economic argumentation in international maritime disputes. The paper first explains what the international maritime disputes, their sources and types are, what principles they are subjected to. It also established what should be understood by economic arguments, emphasizing their relative nature, as well as showing the potential of the Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982 as a basis for formulating economic argumentation. The importance of economic argumentation was considered in relation to international disputes regarding the legal status of maritime territories, delimitation of maritime zones, power over the sea and use of the sea. Research, carried out, leads to the following conclusions: 1) economic arguments are present in the reasoning of the parties as well as dispute settlement bodies. However, their probative value is limited; 2) in disputes related to the status of maritime features economic reasoning appears in the context of necessity to demonstrate that they can be a basis for delimitation; 3) in delimitation disputes, addressing economic arguments is more complex and contradictory. Economic arguments may be useful in the second phase of delimitation when relevant circumstances are considered. However, the existing practice shows that the range of economic arguments is limited (they cannot serve as a reason for correction of natural inequalities). International jurisprudence denies taking into account arguments based on level of economic development or economic or financial difficulties of a state (except for the catastrophic repercussions for the livelihood and economic wellbeing of the population), the needs of economic development or performance of economic activities (mining, fishing, shipping). An argument associated with assurance of deposit unity is of some importance (when resources are known or readily ascertainable); 4) in disputes concerning the power over the sea some weight is held by an argument associated with the establishment of economic authority, in particular, of a regulatory and control nature; 5) in disputes related to the use of the sea, the importance of economic reasoning is varied. In disputes concerning the prompt release, the role of the economic argument is limited. On the contrary, it is relevant in disputes related to the violation of rights and economic interests of States and people, if they are protected by international law.
Go to article

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more