North Sea Continental Shelf Case
FACULTY OF LAW
UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MARA
North Sea Continental Shelf Cases
(Federal Republic of Germany v Denmark and The Netherlands)
I.C.J. Reports 1969, p.3
An Analysis
PREPARED BY:
MUHAMMAD ARIF BIN AZMI (LWB05B)
2011149991
This is a research proposal submitted for the subject of LAW510 Public International Law
PREPARED FOR:
ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR IBRAHIM BIN LAMAT
Lecturer of Public International Law (LAW510)
North Sea Continental Shelf Cases: An Analysis
By
MUHAMMAD ARIF BIN AZMI (LWB05B)
2011149991
Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Bachelor in Legal Studies (Hons)
Universiti Teknologi MARA
Faculty of Law
APRIL 2014
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.0
Introduction
1
CHAPTER TWO: SUMMARY OF FACTS
2.0
Summary of Facts
3
CHAPTER THREE: JUDGMENT
3.0
Judgment
5
CHAPTER FOUR: ARISING ISSUES
4.0
Arising Issues
7
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION
5.0
Conclusion
8
1.0 Introduction
In 1969, a series of disputes had come upon the attention of the International Court of Justice and they had been known as The North Sea Continental Shelf cases. The parties involved in the disputes were Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands and were in relation to the delimitation or creation of boundary lines of areas which were rich in oil and gas in the continental shelf in the North Sea.
West Germany, the Netherlands and Denmark wanted to determine where the maritime borders of their countries were. West Germany wanted to use the just and equitable idea and the Netherlands and Denmark wanted to use the equidistance/special circumstances principals in the 1958 Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf. Applying the equidistance principle would cut off ocean access to West Germany while greatly increasing the area under Danish and Dutch control.
The jurisprudence of the North Sea Continental Shelf Cases sets out the dual requirement for forming customary international law – State practice (objective
UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MARA
North Sea Continental Shelf Cases
(Federal Republic of Germany v Denmark and The Netherlands)
I.C.J. Reports 1969, p.3
An Analysis
PREPARED BY:
MUHAMMAD ARIF BIN AZMI (LWB05B)
2011149991
This is a research proposal submitted for the subject of LAW510 Public International Law
PREPARED FOR:
ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR IBRAHIM BIN LAMAT
Lecturer of Public International Law (LAW510)
North Sea Continental Shelf Cases: An Analysis
By
MUHAMMAD ARIF BIN AZMI (LWB05B)
2011149991
Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Bachelor in Legal Studies (Hons)
Universiti Teknologi MARA
Faculty of Law
APRIL 2014
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.0
Introduction
1
CHAPTER TWO: SUMMARY OF FACTS
2.0
Summary of Facts
3
CHAPTER THREE: JUDGMENT
3.0
Judgment
5
CHAPTER FOUR: ARISING ISSUES
4.0
Arising Issues
7
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION
5.0
Conclusion
8
1.0 Introduction
In 1969, a series of disputes had come upon the attention of the International Court of Justice and they had been known as The North Sea Continental Shelf cases. The parties involved in the disputes were Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands and were in relation to the delimitation or creation of boundary lines of areas which were rich in oil and gas in the continental shelf in the North Sea.
West Germany, the Netherlands and Denmark wanted to determine where the maritime borders of their countries were. West Germany wanted to use the just and equitable idea and the Netherlands and Denmark wanted to use the equidistance/special circumstances principals in the 1958 Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf. Applying the equidistance principle would cut off ocean access to West Germany while greatly increasing the area under Danish and Dutch control.
The jurisprudence of the North Sea Continental Shelf Cases sets out the dual requirement for forming customary international law – State practice (objective