Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T13:22:41.953Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Aegean Sea Continental Shelf Case (Greece v. Turkey)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Get access

Abstract

International law in general — International comity — Whether bringing proceedings before International Court of Justice an unfriendly act

State territory — In general — Nature of territorial sovereignty — Rights over continental shelf — Whether territorial rights — Whether stemming from territorial sovereignty

State territory — Parts of State territory — Boundaries — Water boundaries — Delimitation of continental shelf boundaries

State territory — Parts of State territory — Continental shelf — Character of rights over the continental shelf — Whether territorial rights — Whether dispute about continental shelf rights a dispute relating to territorial status — Greek islands adjacent to Turkish coast — Whether possessing a continental shelf of their own Appropriate method of delimitation

State territory — Parts of State territory — Islands — Greek islands adjacent to the Turkish coast — Whether possessing a continental shelf of their own — Appropriate method of delimitation

Jurisdiction — In general — Territorial — Continental shelf — Whether dispute about continental shelf rights a dispute relating to territorial status — Greek islands adjacent to Turkish coast — Whether possessing a continental shelf of their own — Appropriate method of delimitation

Treaties — In general — Form of international agreements — Press communique issued by two Prime Ministers recording their decision that a dispute would be submitted to the International Court of Justice — Whether capable of amounting to a binding agreement

Treaties — Conclusion and operation of treaties — Reservations — Whether reservation follows evolution of law to take account of new areas of law — Interpretation of reservations — Object and purpose — Distinction between intention and motive — Reference to trauaux preparatoires — Reciprocity — Whether Respondent State entitled to take advantage of reciprocal application of reservation in dispute settlement treaty without appearing before the Court

Treaties — Conclusion and operation of treaties — Operation and enforcement — Settlement of disputes agreement — Whether following evolution of law to include disputes relating to new legal issues

Treaties — Termination of treaties — By operation of law — General Act for the Pacific Settlement of Disputes 1928 — Whether terminated on dissolution of the League of Nations — Change of circumstances — Desuetude — Whether a ground for termination of treaties — Whether leading to termination of General Act

Treaties — Interpretation — Principles and rules of interpretation — Interpretation of reservation — Grammatical construction of reservation ambiguous — Reference to object and purpose — Distinction between intention and motive — Reference to travaux preparatoires — Whether reservation intended to follow evolution of law to take account of new legal issues — Interpretation of informal press communique — Reference to negotiating history

Treaties — Interpretation — Multilingual treaties — Examination of English and French texts of Greek reservation to General Act for the Pacific Settlement of Disputes 1928 — Reference to travaux preparatoires of reservation — Relevance of Greek text of travaux preparatoires

Treaties — Interpretation — Consideration of preparatory work — Examination of preparatory work of reservation to treaty

International organization and administration — The United Nations — The Security Council — Dispute referred to Security Council and International Court of Justice simultaneously — Whether proper for Court to consider case

Disputes — International Court of Justice — Contentious jurisdiction — Procedure — Refusal of Respondent State to take part in proceedings — Examination of question of jurisdiction by Court — Extent to which Court may make use of written communications from Respondent — Principle of equality between parties — Indication of interim measures of protection — When necessary

Disputes — Negotiation — Dispute referred to International Court of Justice while negotiations still taking place — Whether a dispute — Whether proper for Court to hear case — Interaction between different methods for the peaceful settlement of disputes — Article 33 of the Charter of the United Nations

Disputes — International Court of Justice — Contentious jurisdiction — Competence — Respondent State declining to take part in proceedings — Duty of Court to satisfy itself that it has jurisdiction — Alternative bases for jurisdiction advanced by Applicant — General Act for the Pacific Settlement of Disputes 1928 — Whether in force — Applicant’s reservation to General Act — Whether Respondent entitled to take advantage of reservation without appearing before Court — Press communique stating that Prime Ministers of two States have agreed to submit case to the Court — Whether a basis for jurisdiction in respect of unilateral application by one State

Competence — Competence of the Court challenged on two grounds — Court entitled to base decision on whichever ground seems clearer

Procedure — Refusal of Respondent State to appear before Court — Consequences — Article 53 of the Statute of the Court — Extent to which Court can take account of written communications from the Respondent

Interim measures of protection — Circumstances in which indication of interim measures is required — Whether risk of irreparable prejudice needed — Whether Court has inherent power to indicate interim measures to prevent aggravation of dispute and threat to peace

Dispute also taken before United Nations Security Council — Whether proper for Court to consider dispute of which Council is seised — Difference between political and legal disputes — Negotiations — Whether fact that negotiations are in progress deprives Court of jurisdiction — Whether fact negotiations are taking place means there is no dispute — Interaction of methods of peaceful settlement — Article 33 of the Charter of the United Nations

Treaties — Interpretation — Interpretation of reservation — Grammatical construction ambiguous — Interaction of the parties — Distinction between intention and motive — Reference to trauaux preparatoires of reservation — Reservation in respect of disputes relating to “territorial status” — Whether including disputes about continental shelf — Whether including delimitation dispute

Treaties — Change of circumstances — Evolution of international law — Development of doctrine of the continental shelf — Whether treaty providing for settlement of disputes follows evolution of law to cover disputes about new area of the law — Whether reservation also follows evolution of the law

Treaties — Termination — Desuetude — Whether a ground for termination — General Act for the Pacific Settlement of Disputes 1928 — Whether remaining in force while not used — Whether surviving dissolution of the League of Nations

Treaties — Form of international agreements — Press communique issued by two Prime Ministers — Whether capable of constituting a binding international agreement — Interpretation

Jurisdiction — Continental shelf — Character of rights over the continental shelf — Whether territorial rights — Whether dispute about continental shelf rights a dispute relating to territorial status

Type
Case Report
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)