Equitable Principles in the Delimitation of the Aegean Continental Shelf

Maciej Górka

doi:10.21697/2022.12.2.09

Published: 2022-12-16

Vol. 11 No. 2 (2022)

Equitable Principles in the Delimitation of the Aegean Continental Shelf

Maciej Górka

Polish Review of International and European Law

Section: Articles

https://doi.org/10.21697/2022.12.2.09

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to present the role of equitable principles in the delimitation of the continental shelf in the specific situation of the Aegean area.
First, the theoretical aspects of the equity in international law and its typology are presented, followed by explaining the role of equitable principles in maritime relations. In turn, the author explains the interdependence of equity and geographical conditions, while stressing the unique geography of the Aegean, bearing heavily on delimitation efforts in the region. The context of the Greek-Turkish continental shelf delimitation dispute is explained, drawing attention to the divergent positions of the two countries. The rules applicable to the dispute at hand are then analysed, with a focus on customary law, in the absence of treaty rules applicable between Greece and Turkey as concerns the maritime delimitation. The role of the international courts and tribunals in finding solutions in the disputes involving the delimitation of the continental shelf is discussed, by also presenting their approach to interpreting and applying equity and equitable principles. The three-stage delimitation method elaborated in the case-law based on equitable principles is finally presented, while drawing attention to the difficulties in applying the method in practice and the resulting therefrom inconsistencies.
Finally, the conclusions of the above considerations for the Aegean continental shelf delimitation are drawn and the perspectives for finding a solution in the future are presented.

Download files

PDF

Citation rules

Górka, M. (2022). Equitable Principles in the Delimitation of the Aegean Continental Shelf. Polish Review of International and European Law, 11(2), 199–227. https://doi.org/10.21697/2022.12.2.09

Cited by / Share

References

1. Acer, Y. The Aegean Maritime Disputes and International Law. London, 2017.
2. The Aegean Sea Continental Shelf (Greece v. Turkey) case, I.C.J. Reports 1978.
3. Arbitration between Barbados and the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago (Barbados v. Trinidad, and Tobago), Award of 11 April 2006, RIAA vol. XXVII.
4. Arbitration between Guyana and Suriname (Guyana v. Suriname), Award of 17 September 2007, RIAA vol. XXX.
5. Bölükbasi, D. Turkey and Greece: The Aegean Disputes: A Unique Case in International Law. London-Portland, 2004.
6. The Continental Shelf (Libyan Arab Jarnahiriya/Malta) case, Judgement of 3 June 1985, I.C.J. Reports 1985.
7. The Continental Shelf (Tunisia/Libyan Arab Jamahiriya) case, Judgement of 24 February 1982, I.C.J. Reports 1982.
8. Cottier, T. Equitable Principles of Maritime Boundary Delimitation. The Quest for Distributive Justice in International Law. Cambridge, 2015.
9. Czapliński, W., Wyrozumska, A. Prawo międzynarodowe publiczne. Warszawa, 2004.
10. Delabie, L. “The Role of Equity, Equitable Principles, and the Equitable Solution in Maritime Delimitation”. In Maritime Boundary Delimitation: The Case Law: Is It Consistent and Predictable? edited by Oude Elferink A.G., Henriksen T., Busch S.V., Cambridge, 2018.
11. The Delimitation of the Continental Shelf between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the French Republic (UK v. France) case, Decision of 30 June 1977, RIAA vol. XVIII 3-413.
12. Van Dyke, J.M. “An Analysis of the Aegean Disputes under International Law.” Ocean Development & International Law, 2005, 36:1.
13. Francioni, F. “Equity in International Law”, Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law.
14. The Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Republic of Mali) case, Judgement of 22 December 1986, I.C.J Reports 1986.
15. Gilas, J. “Equitable principles of the delimitation of continental shelf.” Polish Yearbook of International Law, 1991-1992, Vol. 19.
16. Gilas, J. “Equitable principles of the delimitation of continental shelf.” Revista Europea de Derecho de la Navegación Marítima y Aeronáutica, 1993, no. 9.
17. Gilas, J. “Maritime boundaries of Poland with its neighbouring countries.” Prawo Morskie, 1998, vol. 10.
18. Gilas, J. “Notion of Justice in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.” Prawo Morskie, 1988, vol. II.
19. Gilas, J. “Pomeranian Bay: an example of the resolution of disputes between Socialist Countries over natural resources in border areas.” Transboundary Resources Report, 1990, vol. 4 no. 1.
20. Gilas, J. „Pojęcie sprawiedliwości w nowej konwencji o prawie morza.” Prawo Morskie, 1986, vol. 1.
21. Gilas, J. „Prawne problemy delimitacji wód terytorialnych w Zatoce Pomorskiej.” Przegląd Zachodni, 1996, no. 1.
22. Gilas, J. „Prawnomiędzynarodowe problemy delimitacji obszarów morskich PRL z państwami sąsiednimi.” Przegląd Stosunków Międzynarodowych, 1989, no. 1-2 (137-138).
23. Gilas, J. Prawo międzynarodowe. Toruń, 1999.
24. Gilas, J. „Stan prawnomiędzynarodowy Zatoki Pomorskiej w świetle zmian w prawie morza.” In Problemy morskich wód przybrzeżnych Polski, edited by Jaskot K. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego, 1989.
25. Gilas, J. „Status prawnomiędzynarodowy Zatoki Pomorskiej.” Technika i Gospodarka Morska, 1987, R. 37 no. 6.
26. Gilas, J. „Zasady słusznościowe delimitacji szelfu kontynentalnego.. Zeszyty Naukowe Wydziału Prawa i Administracji Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego, Studia Iuridica Maritima,1990, no. 2.
27. Gilas, J., Łopuszyński, J. Prawo morskie. Bydgoszcz, 1996.
28. Gourgourinis, A. Equity and Equitable Principles in the World Trade Organization. Addressing Conflicts and Overlaps between the WTO and Other Regimes, Routledge, 2017.
29. Kotzur, M. “Ex Aequo et Bono.” Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law.
30. Kwiatkowska, B. “The International Court of Justice Doctrine of Equitable Principles Applicable to Maritime Delimitation and Its Impact on the International Law of the Sea.” In Forty Years International Court of Justice: Jurisdiction, Equity and Equality, edited by Bloed A., Van Dijk P. Utrecht, 1988.
31. Lauterpacht, H. The Development of International Law by the International Court. London, 1958.
32. Marghelis, A. “The maritime delimitation agreement between Greece and Italy of 9 June 2020: An analysis in the light of International Law, national interest and regional politics.” Marine Policy, 2021, vol. 126, April 2021.
33. Maritime Delimitation in the Area between Greenland and Jan Mayen (Denmark v. Norway), Judgement of 14 June 1993, I.C.J. Reports 1993.
34. The Maritime Delimitation in the Black Sea (Romania v. Ukraine) case, Judgment of 3 February 2009, I.C.J. Reports 2009.
35. McRae, D. “The Applicable Law. The Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf, the LOSC, and Customary International Law.” In Maritime Boundary Delimitation: The Case Law: Is It Consistent and Predictable?, edited by Oude Elferink A.G., Henriksen T., Busch S.V. Cambridge, 2018.
36. Miyoshi M. “Considerations on Equity in Maritime Boundary Cases before the International Court of Justice.” In Liber Amicorum Judge Shigeru Oda, edited by Ando N., McWhinney E., Wolfrum R., Baker Röben B. Leiden, 2002.
37. Perelman, Ch. Le problème des lacunes en droit. Bruxelles, 1968.
38. Rosenne, S. The Law and Practice of the International Court. 1965, vol. II.
39. Sandorski, J., Hołowiński, J.T., Gilas, J. Prawo morskie, vol. 4 (1990).
40. Schaller, C. “Delimitation by judicial process as an optioangn for Greece and Turkey in the Eastern Mediterranean.” Leiden Journal of International Law, 2022.
41. Schofield, C. “Islands or Rocks, is that the Real Question? The Treatment of Islands in the Delimitation of Maritime Boundaries.” In The Law of the Sea Convention: US Accession and Globalisation, edited by Nordquist M.H., Norton Moore J., Soons A.H.A., Kim H. Leiden, 2012.
42. The Territorial and Maritime Dispute between Nicaragua and Honduras in the Caribbean Sea (Nicaragua v. Honduras) case, Judgment of 8 October 2007, I.C.J. Reports 2007.
43. Theodoropoulos, B. “The So-Called Aegean Dispute: What Are the Stakes: What Is the Cost?” In Greece and the Law of the Sea, edited by Kariotis Th.C. Brill Nijhoff, 1997.
44. Titi, C. The Function of Equity in International Law. Oxford, 2021.
45. Velos, J. “The Aegean Continental Shelf Dispute between Greece and Turkey and the International Law Principles Applicable in the Delimitation of the Aegean Continental Shelf.” Revue Hellenique de Droit International, vols. 40-41, 1987-88.
46. Yiallourides, C. Maritime Disputes and International Law: Disputed Waters and Seabed Resources in Asia and Europe. Abingdon, 2019. Google Scholar