1 / 15

Many Courts Little Jurisdiction No Settled Law?

Many Courts Little Jurisdiction No Settled Law?. Dr. Irini Papanicolopulu Senior Researcher, University of Milano-Bicocca Lecturer in International Law, University of Glasgow. Porto, 23 May 2014. Pollution of the marine environment. Consequences.

Download Presentation

Many Courts Little Jurisdiction No Settled Law?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Many CourtsLittle Jurisdiction No Settled Law? Dr. Irini Papanicolopulu Senior Researcher, University of Milano-Bicocca Lecturer in International Law, University of Glasgow Porto, 23 May 2014

  2. Pollution of the marine environment

  3. Consequences Degradation/destruction may concern all aspects of the natural environment: Animals Vegetation Soil Water systems Ecosystems

  4. Costs • Exxon Valdez (Alaska, 1989): Cleanup cost in the region of US$2.5 billion and total costs (including fines, penalties and claims settlements) estimated up to US$7 billion • Amoco Cadiz (France, 1978): cost about US $282 million, of which about half was for legal fees and accrued interest • Erika (France, 1999): total of 76 million FF (11.4 million euros) was allocated to compensating potential victims, through the ship owner's insurance. Additional compensation was made available through IOPC funds, reaching up to 1.119 billion FF (168 million euros), making a total of 1.195 billion FF (179 million euros) • Prestige (Galicia, 2002): clean-up costs amounting to some US $2.8 billion

  5. Actors • States • Flag • Coastal • National • International Organisations • EU • Regional IOs • Subject-specific IOs • Local communities • Individuals • Master/crew/operators • Affected • Victims • Classifications societies • P&I and insurers • NGOs

  6. Courts • ITLOS • CJEU • Arbitral Tribunal (Annex VII) • Arbitral Tribunal (OSPAR) • ECHR • Domestic tribunals

  7. Jurisdiction • Sources • UNCLOS • EU law • Other treaties • National legislation • Limitations • Ratione materiae • Ratione personae • Ratione loci

  8. Law? Member States undertake not to submit a dispute concerning the interpretation or application of the Treaties to any method of settlement other than those provided for therein. Article 344 TFEU (ex Article 292 TEC)

  9. Law? If the States Parties which are parties to a dispute concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention have agreed, through a general, regional or bilateral agreement or otherwise, that such dispute shall, at the request of any party to the dispute, be submitted to a procedure that entails a binding decision, that procedure shall apply in lieu of the procedures provided for in this Part, unless the parties to the dispute otherwise agree. Article 282 UNCLOS (Obligations under general, regional or bilateral agreements)

  10. Law? ‘it is interesting to examine the approach taken by the Tribunal in cases relating to the detention of a foreign national by the coastal State and the fixing of the amount of bail’ ECtHR, Mangouras v Spain

  11. Law? • Conflict of jurisdictions • Primacy (prohibition to submit disputes to other courts) • Subsidiarity (prevalence of other dispute settlement mechanisms • Conflict of legal rules • Primacy • Subsidiarity • Taking into account • Factual relevance

  12. ‘The environment is not an abstraction but represents the living space, the quality of life and the very health of human beings, including generations unborn.’ ICJ Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, 1996, para. 29

  13. Thank you!

More Related