《国际海洋法》

C. Whomersley
{"title":"《国际海洋法》","authors":"C. Whomersley","doi":"10.1163/22134484-12340121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe concept of “historic rights” has been much discussed recently in the light of the arbitral award in the Philippines v. China case. The United Kingdom, as a major maritime power, has had long experience of dealing with claims about such rights and those which are similarly worded. This includes the seminal case of the Anglo-Norwegian Fisheries case in the International Court of Justice, as well as two other international decisions and a judgment of what is now the Court of Justice of the European Union (EU). In addition, the London Fisheries Convention and the European Union’s Common Fisheries Policy seem to employ terminology to similar effect. Finally, it is interesting to speculate about whether claims to historic rights will be made by other EU Member States after BREXIT.","PeriodicalId":325796,"journal":{"name":"The Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The International Law of the Sea\",\"authors\":\"C. Whomersley\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/22134484-12340121\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThe concept of “historic rights” has been much discussed recently in the light of the arbitral award in the Philippines v. China case. The United Kingdom, as a major maritime power, has had long experience of dealing with claims about such rights and those which are similarly worded. This includes the seminal case of the Anglo-Norwegian Fisheries case in the International Court of Justice, as well as two other international decisions and a judgment of what is now the Court of Justice of the European Union (EU). In addition, the London Fisheries Convention and the European Union’s Common Fisheries Policy seem to employ terminology to similar effect. Finally, it is interesting to speculate about whether claims to historic rights will be made by other EU Member States after BREXIT.\",\"PeriodicalId\":325796,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/22134484-12340121\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22134484-12340121","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

近年来,在菲律宾诉中国仲裁案的仲裁裁决中,“历史性权利”的概念引起了广泛的讨论。联合王国作为一个主要的海洋大国,在处理有关这些权利的要求和那些措辞类似的要求方面有着长期的经验。这包括在国际法院的盎格鲁-挪威渔业案件的开创性案例,以及其他两个国际决定和现在的欧盟法院(EU)的判决。此外,《伦敦渔业公约》和欧洲联盟的共同渔业政策似乎也使用了类似的术语。最后,有趣的是,在英国脱欧后,其他欧盟成员国是否会对历史权利提出要求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The International Law of the Sea
The concept of “historic rights” has been much discussed recently in the light of the arbitral award in the Philippines v. China case. The United Kingdom, as a major maritime power, has had long experience of dealing with claims about such rights and those which are similarly worded. This includes the seminal case of the Anglo-Norwegian Fisheries case in the International Court of Justice, as well as two other international decisions and a judgment of what is now the Court of Justice of the European Union (EU). In addition, the London Fisheries Convention and the European Union’s Common Fisheries Policy seem to employ terminology to similar effect. Finally, it is interesting to speculate about whether claims to historic rights will be made by other EU Member States after BREXIT.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Indo-Pacific Strategy: Korea and the World Korean Judicial Decision Korean Judicial Decision Korean Judicial Decisions Korean Judicial Decision
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1