The study addresses the challenges facing the law of the sea. Although UNCLOS is rightly described as a constitution of the law of the sea, it does not and cannot give answers to all problems and doubts that arise in practice and that are related to global warming, protection of biodiversity, legal status of genetic resources, controversy concerning shipping, delimitation of areas or the protection of underwater cultural heritage. Hence the question arises, what the ways and means of further development of the law of the sea are. Undoubtedly, one of the possibilities is to develop implementation agreements, of which the third devoted to the protection and sustainable use of marine biodiversity outside national jurisdiction is the subject of an international conference convened by the General Assembly, whose resolutions in the area of the law of the sea play an important role. Undoubtedly, also the importance of the organization of the United Nations system, such as the IMO, FAO, UNESCO, UNEP is significant. There is also the possibility of accepting agreements addressing the issues left by UNCLOS without solution or definition. Not without significance is the soft law and the practice of states as well as the position of the organs appointed by UNCLOS.
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.
The continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles (NM) accounts for a great value for States. The development of technologies and science has allowed the human economic and scientific activities on the deep parts of the ocean floor. The continental shelf is rich with living resources. The living resources of continental shelf are also valuable, since they possess valuable genetic resources for pharmaceuticals and commercial products. Many valuable non-living resources are situated on the continental shelf, including hydrocarbons (oil and gas) and minerals (e.g. manganese, nickel, cobalt, gold, diamonds, copper, tin, titanium, iron, chromium and galena). Therefore, States have spent significant resources on conducting a research and exploring their continental shelf and the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) has received seventy-seven submissions and issued twenty-nine recommendations pursuant to Article 76 (8) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). With the expected improvement of technological capabilities in decades to come, especially, in deep waters, the continental shelf will be explored more thoroughly and perhaps will meet no technological limits.
The Author tries to “think out of the box”, presenting “Sponsalia ex hoc mundo” (“Hand fastening out of this world”). The title reflects the view that the outer space sciences and the sea sciences are analytically separable, but practically interlinked. It might be observed in the context of space technology and satellite technics, a new system of management and government, as well as a new system of law and policy. Nowadays, the outer space infrastructure (the use of artificial Earth satellites for Direct Television Broadcasting, communications, remote sensing, navigation, military missiles) affects infrastructure of our Planet, including maritime infrastructure. There is, therefore, the need for a new face of integrated system of science and practice.
The concept of a Ship Management is vaguely known in the Polish law and legal doctrine although the role of the Ship Manager has become quite complex through the years. It started in the eighties when there was a deep change in the shipping market as many shipping companies became bankrupt and mortgagor banks had to turn to ship managers for help.
Thirty years ago in 1988 BIMCO published the first Ship Management Contract which provided the market with a standard document striking a fair balance between the rights and obligations of the owners and the managers, giving some uniformity in the widely used in-house contracts, particularly in the apportionment of liability between parties.
After the implementation of the ISM Code in 1998 and creating the entity called “Company” as a subject responsible for a safe operation of a vessel the ship manager’s role rose extremely. It caused, among other factors, that BIMCO issued the world wide known form of contract named SHIPMAN 98, which was then superseded by its new version issued in 2009.
The main goal of this article is to bring a reader closer to the issue of a Ship Management and the Ship Manager through a Polish translation of this modern BIMCO form named SHIPMAN 2009.
This article aims to discuss the notion of environmental damage under the CLC 1992 and FUND 1992 as stated in the new Guidelines for Presenting Claims for Environmental Damage prepared by the International Oil Pollution Compensation Funds. That approach is contrasted with the solution adopted in the United States of America under the OPA. Particular attention is given to the problems of compensation for lost services of the environment, as well as providing alternative environment as a restoration measure. The judgments of French and Spanish courts in the Erika and Prestige cases are discussed, raising questions as to suitability of the CLC 1992/FUND 1992 system.
The purpose of this analysis is to deal with the first of the conditions for commencement of laytime, i.e. obligation of the vessel to arrive at the agreed destination. The position, prima facie, with regard to berth, dock or port is relatively straightforward, it having been established that the vessel only becomes an arrived ship when it enters the specified berth, dock or port, respectively. In all three cases, in principle, the risk of delay in reaching the specified berth, dock or port is borne by the shipowner. In many cases, the shipowners, for obvious reasons are not prepared to bear such a risk for loss and take appropriate action. In particular, they demand the inclusion, in the charterparty, of a specific clause shifting the risk of such loss. We will deal therein below with one of the most commonly used forms of such a clause namely – “Time lost waiting for a berth clause” against broader picture of current English jurisdiction.
en
pl
