Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T15:26:00.815Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Camouco (Panama v. France)

International Tribunal.  07 February 2000 .

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Get access

Abstract

International tribunals — International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea — Applicable law — United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982 — Judicial function — Relationship between Convention and the Rules of the Tribunal

Sea — Exclusive economic zone (“EEZ”) — Coastal State jurisdiction over EEZ — Arrest of vessel — Requirement of prompt release — United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982, Articles 73 and 292 — Amount of bond for release of vessel and Master — Whether reasonable — Criteria of reasonableness

Treaties — Interpretation and application — United Nations Convention on the Sea, 1982

Keywords

International tribunalsSeaTreaties
Type
Case Report
Information
International Law Reports , Volume 125 , 2004 , pp. 164 - 219
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2004

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.)

References

1 A. O. Adede, The System for Settlement of Disputes under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, A Drafting History and a Commentary, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht/Boston/Lancaster, 1987, p. 161.

2 Center for Oceans Law and Policy, University of Virginia, United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982, A Commentary, Vol. V, M. H. Nordquist, Editor-in-Chief, S. Rosenne and L. B. Sohn, Volume Editors, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht/Boston/London, 1989, pp. 70–1.

3 Ibid., pp. 69–70.

4 See R. Lagoni, “The Prompt Release of Vessels and Crews before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: A Preparatory Report”, The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, Vol. 11, No 2, 1996, p. 152.

5 Statement in Response of the French Government, 25 January 2000, paragraph 10 of the section relating to the law (English translation of the Statement in Response).

6 Lagoni, op. cit., p. 150.

7 As to how the Applicant interprets the 10-day limit, see the Application of Panama, paragraph 4 (English translation of the Application)

8 Application of Panama, paragraph 40 (English translation of the Application). See also paragraph 42 of the Judgment.