The Cross-Fertilization of UNCLOS, Custom and Principles Relating to Procedure in the Jurisprudence of UNCLOS Courts and Tribunals

E. Ivanova
{"title":"The Cross-Fertilization of UNCLOS, Custom and Principles Relating to Procedure in the Jurisprudence of UNCLOS Courts and Tribunals","authors":"E. Ivanova","doi":"10.1163/18757413_022001007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Cross-fertilization of international law entails interaction of norms in international law and can occur in the context of interaction between different sources of law; different branches of international law or different subject-matter areas; and interaction between a treaty norm belonging to a one area of international law and a customary norm arising from another area of international law. There are different avenues for cross-fertilization of international law: it can result from the application of Art. 31 (3) (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT)1 in the process of interpreting a particular treaty, from the application of other rules of international law together with a particular treaty or from reference to the jurisprudence of other international courts or tribunals by adhering to the approach adopted in this jurisprudence.\nThis article examines the question of cross-fertilization of international law in the context of the jurisprudence of the courts and tribunals operating within the dispute settlement system established under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (hereinafter ‘UNCLOS’ or ‘Convention’).2 It will demonstrate how these adjudicatory bodies have employed Art. 31 (3) (c) VCLT, Art. 293 UNCLOS which explicitly enables them to apply other rules of international law not incompatible with the Convention, and the international jurisprudence in order to interpret and apply the UNCLOS while situating it the broader context of international law. Note will be taken of UNCLOS provisions incorporating or referring to other rules of international law which also contribute to the cross-fertilization of international law.","PeriodicalId":167092,"journal":{"name":"Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law Online","volume":"51 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law Online","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18757413_022001007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Cross-fertilization of international law entails interaction of norms in international law and can occur in the context of interaction between different sources of law; different branches of international law or different subject-matter areas; and interaction between a treaty norm belonging to a one area of international law and a customary norm arising from another area of international law. There are different avenues for cross-fertilization of international law: it can result from the application of Art. 31 (3) (c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT)1 in the process of interpreting a particular treaty, from the application of other rules of international law together with a particular treaty or from reference to the jurisprudence of other international courts or tribunals by adhering to the approach adopted in this jurisprudence. This article examines the question of cross-fertilization of international law in the context of the jurisprudence of the courts and tribunals operating within the dispute settlement system established under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (hereinafter ‘UNCLOS’ or ‘Convention’).2 It will demonstrate how these adjudicatory bodies have employed Art. 31 (3) (c) VCLT, Art. 293 UNCLOS which explicitly enables them to apply other rules of international law not incompatible with the Convention, and the international jurisprudence in order to interpret and apply the UNCLOS while situating it the broader context of international law. Note will be taken of UNCLOS provisions incorporating or referring to other rules of international law which also contribute to the cross-fertilization of international law.
《联合国海洋法公约》、惯例和程序原则在《联合国海洋法公约》法院和法庭判例中的相互融合
国际法的相互促进需要国际法规范的相互作用,并可在不同法律渊源之间相互作用的背景下发生;国际法的不同分支或不同的主题领域;以及属于一个国际法领域的条约规范和来自另一个国际法领域的习惯规范之间的相互作用。国际法的相互借鉴有不同的途径:可以在解释某一条约的过程中适用《维也纳条约法公约》第31条第3款(c)项,也可以在解释某一条约时同时适用其他国际法规则,或者参照其他国际法院或法庭的判例,坚持这一判例所采用的方法。本文在《联合国海洋法公约》(以下简称“《公约》”或“公约”)所建立的争端解决机制下的法院和法庭的法理背景下考察国际法的相互融合问题它将展示这些裁决机构如何运用《联合国海洋法公约》第31条第3款(c)项(VCLT)和第293条,这些条款明确使它们能够适用与《公约》不相抵触的其他国际法规则,以及国际判例,以便在将《公约》置于更广泛的国际法背景下解释和适用《公约》。将注意到《联合国海洋法公约》的规定纳入或参考了其他国际法规则,这些规则也有助于国际法的相互借鉴。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信