(18.210.12.229) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/02/26 09:17
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:魏惇婷
研究生(外文):Duen-Ting Wei
論文名稱:論《聯合國海洋法公約》爭端解決之強制管轄範圍:以領土主權歸屬爭端為中心
論文名稱(外文):The Limits of Subject-matter Jurisdiction in UNCLOS Compulsory Dispute Settlement: An Analysis of Territorial Sovereignty Disputes
指導教授:姜皇池姜皇池引用關係
指導教授(外文):Huang-Chih Chiang
口試委員:陳貞如吳雨蒼
口試委員(外文):Chen-Ju ChenYu-Tsang Wu
口試日期:2019-06-25
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺灣大學
系所名稱:法律學研究所
學門:法律學門
學類:一般法律學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2019
畢業學年度:107
語文別:英文
論文頁數:135
中文關鍵詞:《1982 年聯合國海洋法公約》強制爭端解決機制事物管轄範圍領土主權歸屬爭端查戈斯群島仲裁案南海仲裁案
DOI:10.6342/NTU201903686
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:94
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
國際法學界長期以來多認為《1982 年聯合國海洋法公約》(下稱《公約》)強 制爭端解決機制之事務管轄範圍乃排除「領土主權歸屬爭端」(territorial sovereignty disputes)。2015 年「查戈斯群島仲裁案」及「南海仲裁案」係目 前依據《公約》強制爭端解決程序並直接且較深入討論《公約》強制爭端解決機 制之事務管轄範圍與「領土主權歸屬爭端」關係之唯二司法判決。此二案件亦開 啟學說間對於領土主權歸屬管轄是否為《公約》強制爭端解決機制之事務管轄範 圍之熱烈討論且眾說紛紜。尤其針對「混合型爭端」(mixed disputes),即同 時涉領土主權歸屬事項及關於《公約》之事項。值得關注者為此二案件中,同樣 係依據《公約》附件七組成之仲裁庭,就兩邊原告看似的相同性質之主張,於認 定其依據公約強制管轄條款第 288 條第 1 款有無管轄權時,做出相反之判斷。
考量強制爭端解決機制之「強制」(compulsory)性質特殊,其管轄範圍應謹慎 判斷。尤其,敏感性高之「領土主權歸屬爭端」是否屬《公約》事務管轄範圍極 具爭議性。此爭議之討論彰顯過去採取之立場未必理所當然,而有重新檢視之必 要。此爭議涉及國際法上如何認定《公約》第 288 條第 1 款管轄條款之範圍。 《公約》之本質乃國際條約,就其條文內涵有爭執者,應循國際法上條約解釋原 則加以闡釋。然,討論該管轄條款之多數學說及實務見解鮮少明示其乃依條約解 釋原則為分析,即便是操作條約解釋之論述未嚴格遵循條約解釋原則。
本論文認為,釐清《公約》強制爭端解決機制之事務管轄範圍須回歸條約解釋原 則以尋求締約當事國之真意。是以,本論文將依國際法上確立之條約解釋原則判 斷「領土主權歸屬爭端」是否屬公約管轄條款第 288 條第 1 款之範圍。本論文試圖整理並分析關於《公約》締結之一手資料和目前學說見解,並實際操作條約 解釋原則於《公約》管轄條款。同時,本論文將分析並觀察「查戈斯群島仲裁案」 及「南海仲裁案」是否與條約解釋結果相符。最後,本文結論認為條約解釋之結 果係《公約》當然排除領土主權歸屬爭端,且不因系單純涉及領土主權爭端或混 合型爭端而異。此外,國際司法實務與條約解釋不一致之情形乃因受訴法院或法 庭具有一定裁量權限,主要系對於解釋《公約》條款、定性原告主張所採原則及 實際適用有相當程度之裁量,而使個案間認定不一致,造成不確定性。本論文認 為往後國際司法判決應循條約解釋原則,使各項解釋元素受到完整考量,使不同 國際法院和法庭間之裁判趨於一致性並具法確定性。
It is a commonly advanced view that disputes of territorial sovereignty are not subject to the compulsory dispute settlement regime under Part XV of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). However, in the recent 2015 Chagos Arbitration and 2016 South China Sea Arbitration, the question became the focus of both arbitral awards and has generated heated debate on whether issues of land sovereignty are subject to the subject-matter jurisdiction of Section 2 (compulsory procedures entailing binding decision) under Part XV of UNCLOS.
Among the various arguments put forth in legal scholarship, few have referred and adhered rigorously to rules of treaty interpretation when interpreting relevant jurisdictional provisions of UNCLOS. A number of academic discussions focus on land sovereignty issues in the context of “mixed disputes,” which refers to either dispute exclusively concerning maritime delimitation and territorial sovereignty or disputes concerning both UNCLOS and non-UNCLOS issues, which are often exemplified by maritime delimitation disputes. However, land sovereignty disputes may raise preliminary questions of jurisdiction in both (pure) territorial sovereignty disputes and mixed disputes. The arguments put forth by Mauritius and the U.K. in the 2015 Chagos Arbitration are an indication of such distinction.
The main task of the thesis is to determine whether and to what extent are territorial sovereignty disputes excluded from compulsory jurisdiction. It seeks to tackle the controversial issue at its root by conducting a construction of UNCLOS Article 288(1) in light of the rule of treaty interpretation under international law. The thesis then delves into how international courts and tribunals tackle disputes concerning land sovereignty. The thesis also analyses whether judicial decisions conform with the interpretation of Article 288(1) and its implications on cases involving land sovereignty brought under compulsory procedures in Section 2 of Part XV UNCLOS.
Acknowledgments ii
Abstract iII
中文摘要 v
Chapter I: Introduction 1
I. Origin and Purpose of Research 1
II. Research Question 2
III. Scope and Method of the Research 3
A. Scope of the Research 3
B. Method of the Research 4
IV. Structure of the Research 4
V. Terms Used 5
A. Mixed Disputes- 5
B. UNCLOS disputes/ Non-UNCLOS disputes- 6
C. UNCLOS Tribunals- 7
Chapter II: Jurisdiction of International Dispute Settlement 8
I. Introduction 8
II. Legal Basis of Jurisdiction 8
A. Sovereignty and State Consent 8
B. Scope of Jurisdiction 11
C. Types of Jurisdiction 12
III. Determining the Scope of Subject-Matter Jurisdiction 14
IV. Conclusion 19
Chapter III: UNCLOS Dispute Settlement Regime 21
I. Part XV of UNCLOS: Dispute Settlement 21
A. Background of UNCLOS Dispute Settlement Regime 21
B. UNCLOS Dispute Settlement Framework 21
C. General Obligation of Pacific Dispute Settlement 24
D. Characteristics of UNCLOS Dispute Settlement 26
II. UNCLOS Compulsory Dispute Settlement 27
A. Introduction 28
B. Negotiating History of UNCLOS Dispute Settlement Regime 30
C. Compulsory Dispute Settlement Procedures 35
III. Conclusion 42
Chapter IV: Treaty Interpretation and the Basis of Jurisdiction for Territorial Sovereignty Disputes 43
I. Recourse to Treaty Interpretation 43
II. The General Rule of Treaty Interpretation 45
A. The VCLT Approach to Treaty Interpretation 46
III. Academic Debate on Jurisdiction over Territorial Sovereignty Disputes 51
A. Academic Literature in Support of Compulsory Jurisdiction over Territorial Sovereignty Disputes 52
B. Academic Literature Against Compulsory Jurisdiction over Territorial Sovereignty Disputes 55
C. Some Observations of the Debate 62
IV. Interpretation of Sources of Jurisdiction over Territorial Sovereignty Disputes 63
A. Article 288(1) 64
B. Article 293 71
C. Article 298(1)(a)(i) 72
V. Conclusion 75
Chapter V: Territorial Sovereignty Disputes in UNCLOS Tribunals 78
I. Chagos Arbitration (Mauritius v. U.K.) 78
A. Background of The Chagos Arbitration 79
B. Mauritius’ First Submission 82
C. Mauritius’ Second Submission 93
D. Dissenting Opinion of Judge Wolfrum and Kateka 95
E. Analysis 97
II. South China Sea Arbitration (the Philippines v. China) 100
A. Background of the South China Sea Arbitration 101
B. Jurisdictional Issue of the Case 102
C. Analysis 113
III. A Comparative Analysis of the Cases 115
Chapter VI: Conclusion 118
Bibliography 122
Adede, A.O. (1987). The System for Settlement of Disputes under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Leiden, The Netherlands: Springer Netherlands.
Amerashinghe, C.F. (2009). Jurisdiction of Specific International Tribunals. Leiden, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Amerashinghe, C.F. (2011). International Arbitral Jurisdiction. Leiden, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Anderson, D. (2016). Peaceful Settlement of Disputes under UNCLOS. In Barrett, J. & Barnes, R. (Eds.) Law of the Sea: UNCLOS as a Living Treaty (pp. 385–415). London, UK: The British Institute of International and Comparative Law.
Aust, A. (2013). Modern Treaty Law and Practice (3rd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Beckman, R. (2014). Part XV and South China Sea. In Jayakumar, S., Koh, T. & Beckman, R. (Eds.) The South China Sea Dispute and Law of the Sea (pp. 229–264). Massachusetts, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Bilder, R. (2007). Adjudication: International Arbitral Tribunals and Courts. In I. William Zartman (Ed.) Peacemaking in International Conflict: Methods and Techniques (pp. 195–226). Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press.
Bjorge, E. (2015). The Vienna Rules, Evolutionary Interpretation, and the Intentions of the Parties. In Bianchi, A., Peat, D., Windsor, M. (Eds.) Interpretation in International Law (pp. 189–204). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Brilmayer, L. & Faure, A. (2014). Initiating Territorial Adjudication: The Who, How, When, and Why of Litigating Contested Sovereignty. In Natalie Klein (Ed.) Litigating International Law Disputes: Weighing the Options (pp. 193–229). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, C. (2013). Inherent Powers in International Adjudication. In Romano, C. P.R., Alter, K. J. & Shany, Y. (Eds.) The Oxford Handbook of International Adjudication (pp. 828–847). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Churchill, R.R. (2006). Some Reflections on the Operation of the Dispute Settlement System of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea During its First Decade. In Freestone, D., Barnes, R. & Ong, D.M. (Eds.) The Law of the Sea: Progress and Prospects (pp.388–416). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Collier, J. & Lowe, V. (1999). The Settlement of Disputes in International Law: Institutions and Procedures. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Crawford, J. (2012). Brownlie’s Principles of Public International Law (8th ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Elias, T.O. (1974). The Modern Law of Treaties. Leiden. The Netherlands: A.W. Sijthoff.
García-Revillo, M. (2015). The Contentious and Advisory Jurisdiction of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill.
Gervasi, M. (2019). The Interpretation of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in the Chagos Marine Protected Area Arbitration: The Influence of the Land Sovereignty Dispute. In Del Vecchio, A. & Virzo, R. (Eds.) Interpretations of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea by International Courts and Tribunals (pp. 191–223). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Karim, M.S. (2014). Litigating Law of the Sea Disputes Using the UNCLOS Dispute Settlement System. In Natalie Klein (Ed.) Litigating International Law Disputes: Weighing the Options (pp. 260–283). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Klein, N. (2005). Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Lagoni, R. (2017). Preamble. In Proelss, A. (Ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: A Commentary (pp. 1–16). Oxford, UK: Hart Publishing.
Marotti, L. (2019). Between Consent and Effectiveness: Incidental Determinations and the Expansion of the Jurisdiction of UNCLOS Tribunals. In Del Vecchio, A. & Virzo, R. (Eds.) Interpretations of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea by International Courts and Tribunals (pp. 383–406). Cham, Switzerland; Springer.
Merrills, J.G. (2017). International Dispute Settlement (6th ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Nordquist, M.H., Rosenne S. & Sohn, L.B. (Eds.) (1989). United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982: A Commentary (Vol. 5). Leiden, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Orakhelashvili, A. (Ed.) (2018). Akehurst’s Modern Introduction to International Law (8th ed). New York, USA: Routledge.
Oxman, B. (2014). Courts and Tribunals: The ICJ, ITLOS, and Arbitral Tribunals. In Rothwell, D. R., Elferink, A. G. O., Scott, K. N., & Stephens, T. (Eds.) The Oxford Handbook of the Law of the Sea (pp. 394–415). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Paulus, A. (2010). International Adjudication. In Besson, S. & Tasioulas, J. (Eds.) The Philosophy of International Law (pp. 207–224). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Popa, L.E. (2018). Patterns of Treaty Interpretation as Anti-Fragmentation Tools: A Comparative Analysis with a Special Focus on the ECtHR, WTO and ICJ. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Ranjeva, R. (1991). Settlement of Disputes. In Dupuy, R.-J. & Vignes, D. (Eds.) A Handbook on the New Law of the Sea (Vol. 2, pp. 1333–1401). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Rao, P.C. (2007). Delimitation Disputes under UNCLOS. In Ndiaye T. M. & Wolfrum, R. (Eds.) Law of the Sea, Environmental Law and Settlement of Disputes: Liber Amicorum Judge Thomas A. Mensah (pp. 877–897). Leiden, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Serdy, A. (2017). Article 279: Obligation to settle disputes by peaceful means. In Proelss, A. (Ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: A Commentary (pp. 1813–1817). Oxford, UK: Hart Publishing.
Serdy, A. (2017). Article 281: Procedure where no Settlement has been reached by the parties. In Proelss, A. (Ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: A Commentary (pp. 1820–1824). Oxford, UK: Hart Publishing.
Serdy, A. (2017). Article 298: Optional exceptions to applicability of section 2. In Proelss, A. (Ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: A Commentary (pp. 1918–1932). Oxford, UK: Hart Publishing.
Shany, Y. (2013). Jurisdiction and Admissibility. In Romano, C. P.R., Alter, K. J. & Shany, Y. (Eds.) The Oxford Handbook of International Adjudication (pp. 779–805). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Sinclair, I. (1984). The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (2nd ed.). Manchester, UK : Manchester University Press.
Talmon, S. (2014) The South China Sea Arbitration: Is There a Case to Answer?. In Talmon, S. & Jia, B.B. (Eds.) The South China Sea Arbitration: A Chinese Perspective (pp, 15–79). Oxofrd, UK: Hart Publishing.
Treves, T. (2006). What Have The United Nations Convention And The International Tribunal For The Law Of The Sea To Offer As Regards Maritime Delimitation Disputes?. In Lagoni, R. & Vignes, D. (Eds.) Maritime Delimitation (pp. 63–78). Leiden, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Treves, T. (2017). Article 286: Application of procedures under this section. In Proelss, A. (Ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: A Commentary (pp. 1844–1849). Oxford, UK: Hart Publishing.
Villiger, M.E. (2009). Commentary on the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Leiden, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
von Bogdandy, A. & Venzke, I. (2014). In Whose Name: A Public Law Theory of International Adjudication. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Zengerling, C. (2013). Greening International Jurisprudence. Leiden. The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Adede, A.O. (1975). Settlement of Dispute Arising Under the Law of the Sea Convention. The American Journal of International Law, 69(4), 798–819.
Allen, S. (2017). Article 297 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the Scope of Mandatory Jurisdiction. Ocean Development & International Law, 48(3–4), 313–330.
Boyle, A. (1997). Dispute Settlement and the Law of the Sea Convention: Problems of Fragmentation and Jurisdiction. International & Comparative Law Quarterly, 46(1), 37–54.
Buga, I. (2012). Territorial Sovereignty Issues in Maritime Disputes: A Jurisdictional Dilemma for Law of the Sea Tribunals. The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, 27(1), 59–95.
Churchill, R. (2017). The General Dispute Settlement System of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea: Overview, Context, and Use. Ocean Development & International Law, 48(3–4), 216–238.
Colson, D.A. & Vohrer, B.J. (2015). In re Chagos Marine Protected Area (Mauritius v. United Kingdom). The American Journal of International Law, 109(4) , 845-851.
Fitzmaurice, G. (1957). The Law and Procedure of the International Court of Justice 1951-4: Treaty Interpretation and Other Treaty Points. British Yearbook of International Law, 33, 203–293.
Gautier, P. (2006). The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: Activities in 2005. Chinese Journal of International Law, 5(2), 381–396.
Guilfoyle, D. (2018). The South China Sea Award: How Should We Read the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea?. Asian Journal of International Law, 8(1), 51–63.
Harrison, J. (2017). Defining Disputes and Characterizing Claims: Subject- Matter Jurisdiction in Law of the Sea Convention Litigation. Ocean Development & International Law, 48(3–4), 269–283.
Jacobs, F.G. (1969). Varieties of Approach to Treaty Interpretation: With Special Reference to the Draft Convention on the Law of Treaties before the Vienna Diplomatic Conference. International & Comparative Law Quarterly, 18(2), 318-346 (1969)
Jensen, Ø. & Bankes, N. (2017). Compulsory and Binding Dispute Resolution under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: Introduction. Ocean Development & International Law, 48(3–4), 209–215.
Jia, B.B. (2014). The Principle of the Domination of the Land over the Sea: A Historical Perspective on the Adaptability of the Law of the Sea to New Challenges. German Yearbook of International Law, 57, 63-94.
Klein, N. (2016). Expansions and Restrictions in the UNCLOS Dispute Settlement Regime: Lessons from Recent Decisions. Chinese Journal of International Law, 15(2), 403–415.
Klein, N. (2017). The Vicissitudes of Dispute Settlement under the Law of the Sea Convention. The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, 32(2), 332–363.
McDorman, T.L. (2000). Global Ocean Governance and International Adjudicative Dispute Resolution. Journal of Ocean and Coastal Management, 43, 255–275.
Nguyen, L.N. (2016). The Chagos Marine Protected Area Arbitration: Has the Scope of LOSC Compulsory Jurisdiction Been Clarified?. The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, 31, 120–143.
Oda, S. (1995) Dispute Settlement Prospects in the Law of the Sea. International & Comparative Law Quarterly, 44(4), 863-872.
Oxman, B.H. (1981). The Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea: The Ninth Session (1980). The American Journal of International Law, 75(2), 211- 256.
Parlett, K. (2017). Beyond the Four Corners of the Convention: Expanding the Scope of Jurisdiction of Law of the Sea Tribunals. Ocean Development & International Law, 48(3–4), 284–299.
Proelss, A. (2018). The Limits of Jurisdiction Ratione Materiae of UNCLOS Tribunals. Hitotsubashi Journal of Law and Politics, 46, 47–60.
Qu, W. (2016). The Issue of Jurisdiction Over Mixed Disputes in the Chagos Marine Protection Area Arbitration and Beyond. Ocean Development & International Law, 47(1), 40–51.
SHI, J. (2010). MARITIME DELIMITATION IN THE JURISPRUDENCE OF THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE. CHINESE JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, 9(2), 271–291.
Sofaer, A.D. (2016). The Philippine Law of the Sea Action against China: Relearning the Limits of International Adjudication. Chinese Journal of International Law, 15(2), 393-402.
Talmon, S. (2016). The Chagos Marine Protected Area Arbitration: Expansion of The Jurisdiction of UNCLOS Part XV Courts and Tribunals. International & Comparative Law Quarterly, 65(4), 927–951.
Talmon, S. (2016). The South China Sea Arbitration: Observations on the Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility. Chinese Journal of International Law, 15(2), 309–391.
Thirlway, H. (1999). The Law and Procedure of the International Court of Justice 1960–1989: Part Nine. British Yearbook of International Law, 69(1), 1–83.
Tzeng, P. (2016). Jurisdiction and Applicable Law Under UNCLOS. Yale Law Journal, 126, 242–260.
Tzeng, P. (2016). Supplemental Jurisdiction under UNCLOS. Houston Journal of International Law, 38(2), 499–575.
Tzeng, P. (2017). Ukraine v. Russian and Philippines v. China: Jurisdiction and Legitimacy. Denver Journal of International Law & Policy, 46(1) 1–19.
Volbeda, M.B. (2006). The MOX Plant Case: The Question of “Supplemental Jurisdiction” for International Environmental Claims Under UNCLOS. Texas International Law Journal, 42, 211–240.
Wood, M. (2007). The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and General International Law. The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, 22(3), 351–367.
Yee, S. (2014). The South China Sea Arbitration (The Philippines v. China): Potential Jurisdictional Obstacles or Objections, Chinese Journal of International Law 13(4), 663–739.
Zou, K. & Ye, Q. (2017). Interpretation and Application of Article 298 of the Law of the Sea Convention in Recent Annex VII Arbitrations: An Appraisal. Ocean Development & International Law, 48(3–4), 331–344.
Garrido-Muñoz, A. (2018). Dispute. In Wolfrum, R. (Ed.) Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (Online ed.). http://opil.ouplaw.com.
Mensah, T.A. (1998). The Dispute Settlement Regime of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. In Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law (Vol. 2, Online ed. pp. 307–323). https://doi.org/10.1163/187574198X00109.
Optional Protocol of Signature concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes, Status of Treaties, United Nations Treaty Collection, https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=IND&mtdsg_no=XXI-5&chapter=21&clang=_en.
Pallet, A. (2014). Judicial Settlement of International Disputes. In Wolfrum, R. (Ed.) Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (Online ed.). http://opil.ouplaw.com.
Position Paper of the Government of the People’s Republic of China on the Matter of Jurisdiction in the South China Sea Arbitration Initiated by the Republic of the Philippines (7 December 2014). https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/nanhai/eng/snhwtlcwj_1/.
Rao, P.C. (2011). Law of the Sea, Settlement of Disputes. In Wolfrum, R. (Ed.) Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (Online ed.). http://opil.ouplaw.com.
Rosenne, S. (2006). International Courts and Tribunals, Jurisdiction and Admissibility of Inter-State Applications. In Wolfrum, R. (Ed.) Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (Online ed.). http://opil.ouplaw.com.
Thirlway, H. (2006). Compromis. In Wolfrum, R. (Ed.) Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (Online ed. August 2006). http://opil.ouplaw.com.
Treves, T. (2008). Introductory Note to the 1958 Conventions on the Law of the Sea. http://legal.un.org/avl/ha/gclos/gclos.html.
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Status of Treaties, United Nations Treaty Collection. https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetailsIII.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXI-6&chapter=21&Temp=mtdsg3&lang=en.
Wolfrom, R. (2006). Statement to the Informal Meeting of Legal Advisers of Ministries of Foreign Affairs, President of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, 23 October 2006. https://www.itlos.org/press-media/statements-of-the-president/statements-of-president-wolfrum/.
Arctic Sunrise (Netherlands v. Russia), Award, PCA Case No. 2014-02 (Permanent Court of Arbitration 14 August 2015).
Chagos Marine Protected Area (Mauritius v. UK), Award, PCA Case No. 2011-3 (UNCLOS Annex VII Arb. Trib. 18 Mar. 2015), http://www.pca-cpa.org.
Continental Shelf (Libya v. Malta), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1985, 13 (3 June).
Fisheries Jurisdiction (Spain v. Canada), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1998, 432 (4 December).
Guyana v. Suriname, Award, PCA Case No. 2004-4 (UNCLOS Annex VII Arbitral Tribunal 17 September 2007).
Interpretation of Judgments Nos. 7 and 8 (The Chorzów Factory) (Germany v. Poland), 1927 P.C.I.J. (Ser. A) No. 13, 10-11 (16 December).
Interpretation of Peace Treaties with Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania, First Phase, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1950, 56 (30 March).
Kasikili/Sedudu Island (Botswana v. Namibia), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1999, 1045 (13 December).
M/V Saiga (No.2) (Saint Vincent and the Grenadines v. Guinea), Judgment, ITLOS Reports 1999, 10 (1 July).
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. US), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1986, 14 (27 June).
MOX Plant (Ireland v. United Kingdom), Order No.3 (Permanent Court of Arbitration 24 June 2003).
Nuclear Tests (Australia v. France), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1974, 253 (20 December).
Nuclear Tests (New Zealand v. France), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1974, 457 (20 December).
Obligation to Negotiate Access to the Pacific Ocean (Bolivia v. Chile), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2015, 592 (24 September).
Oil Platforms (Iran v. U.S.), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1996, 803 (12 December) (separate opinion of Judge Shahabuddeen).
Oil Platforms (Iran v. U.S.), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2003, 161 (6 November).
South West Africa (Ethiopia v. South Africa; Liberia v. South Africa), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1962, 319 (21 December).
Territorial Dispute (Libyan/ Chad), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1994, 6 (3 February ).
The South China Sea (The Philippines v. China), Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, PCA Case No. 2013-19 (UNCLOS Annex VII Arbitral Tribunal 29 October 2015 ).
The South China Sea, (The Philippines v. China), Award, PCA Case No. 2013-19 (UNCLOS Annex VII Arbitral Tribunal 12 July 2016 ).
Applicability of the Obligation to Arbitrate under Section 21 of the United Nations Headquarters Agreement of 26 June 1947, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1988, 12 (26 April) (separate opinion of Judge Shahabuddeen).
Chagos Marine Protected Area (Mauritius v. UK), PCA Case No. 2011-3 (UNCLOS Annex VII Arb. Trib. 18 March 2015) (dissenting and concurring opinion by Judge Kateka, J. & Judge Wolfrum, R.), http://www.pca-cpa.org.
Chagos Marine Protected Area, Hearing on Jurisdiction and Merits, PCA Reference MU-UK (Vol. 6, 1 May 2014).
The South China Sea, (The Philippines v. China), PCA Case No. 2013-19, Day 1, Hearing on Jurisdiction and Admissibility 89 (UNCLOS Annex VII Arb. Trib. 7 July 2015), http://www.pca-cpa.org.
Convention on Fishing and Conservation of the Living Resources of the High Seas (29 April 1958), 559 U.N.T.S. 285.
Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (18 March 1965), 575 U.N.T.S. 159.
International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (2 November 1973), 1340 U.N.T.S. 61.
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (21 December 1965), 660 U.N.T.S. 195.
Optional Protocol of Signature concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes (29 April 1958), 450 U.N.T.S. 169.
Charter of the United Nations (26 June 1945), 1 U.N.T.S. XVI.
Statute of the International Court of Justice (18 April 1946), 33 U.N.T.S. 993.
Convention on the Continental Shelf (29 April 1958), 499 U.N.T.S. 311.
Convention on the High Seas (29 April 1958), 450 U.N.T.S. 11
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (22 May 1969), 1155 U.N.T.S. 331.
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (10 December 1982), 1833 U.N.T.S. 396.
Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous (29 April 1958), 516 U.N.T.S. 205.
185th Plenary Meeting, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.62/SR.185 (1982). In [1984] XVII Official Records of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea.
51st Plenary Meeting, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.62/SR.51 (1974). In [1975] I Official Records of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea.
International Law Commission Report on the Work of its Fifty-Eighth Session, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/L.682 (2006).
Memorandum by the President of the Conference on document A/CONF.62/WP.9, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.62/WP.9/Add.1 (1976). In [1976] V Official Records of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea.
Memorandum by the President of the Conference on document A/CONF.62/WP.10, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.62/WP.10/Add.1 (1977). In [1978] VIII Official Records of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea.
Organization of the second session of the Conference and allocation of items: report of the General Committee, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.62/28 (1974). In [1975] III Official Records of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea.
Report of the International Law Commission to the General Assembly, 19 U.N. GAOR Supp. No. 9, U.N. Doc. A/5809 (1964). In [1964] 2 Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 173, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/173.
Report of the International Law Commission to the General Assembly, 21 U.N. GAOR Supp. No. 9, U.N. Doc. A/6309/Rev.1 (1966). In [1966] 2 Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 173, U.N. Doc. A/CN.4/191.
Report of the President on the work of the informal plenary meeting of the Conference on the settlement of disputes, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.62/L.59 (1980). In [1982] XIV Official Records of the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea.
UNGA Resolution 2625 (XXV) on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States (24 October 1970), A/RES/25/2625.
Article 19. Interpretation of Treaties. The American Journal of International Law, 29(S2). 937–977 (1935).
Draft Convention on the Law of Treaties. The American Journal of International Law, 29(S2), 657-665 (1935).
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
無相關論文
 
無相關期刊
 
無相關點閱論文
 
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔