North Sea Continental Shelf Cases - CASE Facts PDF

Preview

Summary

notes about case...

Description

North Sea Continental Shelf Cases - CASE FACTS - Series of dispute between Germany, Denmark and the Netherlands over -

-

-

determining the delimitation of shorelines. OPINIO JURIS IS NOT PROVED (opinio juris is the second element necessary to establish a legally binding custom. Opinio juris denotes a subjective obligation, a sense on behalf of a state that it is bound to the law in question.) The Court rejected the contention of Denmark and the Netherlands to the effect that the delimitations in question had to be carried out in accordance with the principle of equidistance as defined in Article 6 of the 1958 Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf, holding: that the Federal Republic, which had not ratified the Convention, was not legally bound by the provisions of Article 6; that the equidistance principle was not a necessary consequence of the general concept of continental shelf rights, and was not a rule of customary international law.

 -

The Court found that the boundary lines in question were to be drawn by agreement between the Parties and in accordance with equitable principles, and it indicated certain factors to be taken into consideration for that purpose. It was now for the Parties to negotiate on the basis of such principles, as they have agreed to do.

1) treaty? - Germany was able to ratify but they didn't and they could have reserved out of A6 2) custom in A6? - no... equidistance was experimental to begin with, can't reserve out of custom 3) custom post A6? - not norm-creating character--2nd choice, not enough ratifications - no evidence of opinio juris CASE IMPORTANCE: State practice (objective element of customary law) requires: Generality (widespread and representative participation), consistency (virtually uniform practice) and duration (long duration of practice not necessary)...