The subject area of this thesis is the proposed international sea regime. The regime in this context refers to the proposed international organization to control the resources of the sea-bed beyond the limits of national jurisdiction. Regime in the above context has a specific meaning and should not be confused with the more general meaning of a regime of the sea. In the more general sense a regime of the sea would encompass the entire law of the sea. Such a broad scope is not intended, therefore no treatment of fishing rights, limitation of nuclear arms, extensive oil deposits at centers are attempted except as they specifically relate to the proposed ocean regime and its jurisdiction.

This thesis is an examination of the United Arab Emirates claim to maritime zones and its practice in determining the boundaries of these zones. Such a comprehensive examination scarcely requires justification or introduction. The political and economic importance of determining the boundary of any state is self-evident. The matter of an undetermined boundary in the resource rich Gulf in particular was, and still is, a major threat to stability in the region. This study focuses on the problem of unsettled maritime boundaries with particular reference to the effect of certain disputed islands on the UAE-Iran boundary in the Arabian Gulf. The study assumes that the less the impact these Islands are afforded, the greater the opportunity of reaching a solution to the related sovereignty dispute between the two parties. Certain methods of dispute settlement are suggested where the restricted effect of these Islands could most readily be obtained. Finally, this work has the benefit of examining the UAE Federal Law of 1993 in respect of delimitation of its maritime boundaries; the Dubai/Sharjah Border Award of 1981, which was published in 1993; and the UAE-Saudi Arabia secret boundary agreement of 197 4, released in 1994. The thesis is divided into seven chapters. The first will examine the issue of maritime zones in international law, as well as the UAE practice in this field. The second and third chapters will address the issue of maritime boundary delimitation in international law. Chapter Four will focus on the UAE practice in determining its maritime boundaries both internal and external. It will also identify the UAE' s potential boundary with neighbouring states. Chapters Five, Six and Seven will be devoted to addressing the overall problem of the Iranian-UAE's un-delimited maritime boundaries. Chapter Five will examine the policy of the two states on offshore boundaries. It will also discuss the boundaries between Iran and the UAE in the Gulf of Oman and in the Abu-Dhabi sector. Chapter Six will discuss in some detail the issue of the three disputed islands, namely, Abu Musa, Greater and Little Tunbs islands, and their effect on the boundary of Iran and the UAE. It will also examine the effect of islands on maritime boundaries in general. The final chapter will address certain methods of disputes settlement that the parties have not yet utilised, which have the potential to facilitate an amicable solution.

No description available.

In 1982 the USA and other major industrial states refused to sign the Convention on the Law of the Sea--the result of the Conference on the Law of the Sea--because of objections to its provisions on the seabed beyond state jurisdiction--the International Seabed Area. According to them the system set up by the Convention is favorable to the third world and inimical to the material and ideological interests of these industrial states. Concurrently, however, the US and its allies argue that the remaining provisions of the Convention are generally accepted and part of International Law. These provisions include, among other, transit passage through straits, the 12nm Territorial Sea, the 200nm Exclusive Economic Zone and the Continental Shelf. In opposition to the Convention's seabed system the US has promoted efforts at a Reciprocating States' Agreement which, thus far, has resulted in a Provisional Understanding among eight western states. In this work I argue that the limits of state jurisdiction are not conclusively set and that both the Exclusive Economic Zone and the Continental Shelf are subject to political and legal challenges. Moreover, these challenges will grow stronger because of competition, primarily among the major industrial states, over the resources and the military and waste disposal uses of the seabed and because of the inconsistencies of major maritime states in their defense of narrow zones of coastal jurisdiction. With respect to the argument of the US and some of its allies that the deep seabed provisions of the Convention are beneficial to the third world and inimical to the major industrial states I suggest that this is not the case. In fact, the major industrial states are the primary beneficiaries of the Convention's seabed resource system, as they are the beneficiaries of the systems regulating the military and waste disposal uses of the High Seas and the international seabed. The core characteristic of the resource system, however, is the protection it offers to the less endowed among these industrial states and to the major industrializing states. Inasmuch as the Provisional Understanding does not protect these states--most of which are in a position to challenge a variety of the Convention's remaining provisions--the Reciprocating States' Agreement strategy is conflictual and destabilizing.

LL.M. (Law) / The position with regard to a number of fairly small result of the proximity of these islands to the coast of South West Africa and the fact that the latter is also entitled to lay claim to maritime zones, the potential for overlapping claims to such zones clearly exists. Consequently a solution is proposed to delimit these zones equitably. It amounts in short to awarding an enclave jurisdictional zone of 12 nautical miles to each of these islands, delimited in accordance with the equidistant principle. It is conceded, however, that in the final instance, the eventual delimitation of all these maritime zones depends on agrertent between the two parties concerned. islands off the coast of South West Africa/Nar'ibia, generally known as the Penguin Islands, their status as well as the maritime zones they may generate, are examined in this study. With the emphasis on the 1958 Geneva Conventions and the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention the endeavours to codify the rules of the Law of the Sea are set out as the backdrop against which the rules applicable to the position of these islands are to be discovered. The various definitions of islands in these codifications are identified and the elements of the definition in the 1982 Convention as well as some of the elements proposed by a number of delegations to the United Nations Law of the Sea Conference, are examined in detail. An investigation into the applicable conventional provisions and state practice, prove that in principle islands, just like mainland areas, are capable of generating territorial waters, a contiguous zone, an economic or fishing zone as w all as a continental shelf. In terms of the 1982 Convention so-called rocks do not qualify to generate areas of jurisdiction to the same extent as islands. The effect of islands on the delimitation of maritime zones between adjacent and opposite states is examined with a view to finding principles which could by analogy be applied to the delimitation of the maritime zones generated by the Penguin Islands and the mainland of South West Africa. In the case of territorial waters, it is initially left to the parties concerned to come to an agreement. Failing such agreement the equidistant principle applies unless a historic title or special circuitstances requires an alternative solution. In a number of instances the solution eventually arrived at amounted to awarding enclave maritime zones to islands and delimiting such zones against that of the opposite state by way of the equidistant principle. In the case of the delimitation of the continental shelf state practice revealed that, depending on their relative geographical location in relation to their own and opposite states, islands are accorded full or limited weight in delimiting the continental shelf between the mainland states concerned. Corresponding principles are applied in the delimitation of economic or fishery zones. South Africa's claims to territorial sovereignty over the Penguin Islands have been repeatedly questioned but the records show that these claims can he indisputably substantiated. Compliance with the definition of an island is of the utmost importance in ascertaining whether an insular formation is entitled to generate any specific maritime zone and, therefore, a description of each of these islands is provided. As a result of the proximity of these islands to the coast of South West Africa and the fact that the latter is also entitled to lay claim to aritime zones, the potential for overlapping claims to such zones clearly exists. Consequently a solution is proposed to delimit these zones equitably. It amounts in hort to awarding an enclave jurisdictional zone of 12 nautical miles to each of these islands, delimited in accordance with the equidistant principle. It is conceded, however, that in the final instance, the eventual delimitation of all these maritime zones depends on agrertent between the two parties concerned.

The thesis deals with selected competition issues that occur within the dynamic and high-risk market of shipping, examining competition law issues in liner consortia and tramp pools through an EU Competition Law prism. These partial function joint ventures are the predominant form of alliances in the maritime sector. Liner trade is primarily organised in consortia, while pools are the most common form of tramp shipping alliance. The thesis' synthetic and analytic research incorporates the methodology and structure used in its competition law bibliography, while the legal analysis is informed with sources from microeconomics and maritime economics. The issues that are examined in relation to shipping include the four main areas of competition law: the relevant market, indicators of dominance, compliance of the alliance agreements with Article 101 TFEU and abusive conducts by dominant undertakings under Article 102 TFEU. The development of the above areas aims to demonstrate the interaction of sector particularities with competition law as a whole.

This study addresses the modern influence of maritime law on air law. In order to demonstrate that the influence still exists, at least in respect of conflicts of jurisdiction, a comparative analysis of the responsibility of the carriers of goods will be carried out in the light of international conventions. / The thesis will consider the new evolution of maritime law, which today, in many aspects, follows air law. It will become clear that both systems face the same difficulties. In particular, the multiplication of international conventions has weakened the aim of uniformity by admitting different regimes of the carriers' liability. Once the causes of conflicts of jurisdiction have been identified, the thesis will analyze how the conventions attempt to solve those conflicts. The use of forum shopping by the parties and the use of forum non conveniens by the courts, reveals that present international solutions are not satisfactory. The practice in maritime law is to consider a conflict prior to its existence and to permit jurisdiction as well as arbitration clauses. While the former clauses are forbidden in air law, arbitration clauses, although accepted in various international air conventions, have never been used until recently in air law, and only in respect of the financing of major projects. / It is therefore possible to believe today, that the maritime approach can and will be followed in respect of conflicts of carriage of goods by air, thus proving that maritime law does still influence the evolution of air law.

The associated ship and the jurisdiction to arrest such a ship created in terms of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act 105 of 1983 is a unique legal institution in the world of maritime law and jurisdiction. The sister ship arrest envisaged by the Arrest Convention, 1952 is encompassed by the associated ship but the concept of an associated ship goes considerably further than the sister ship in going behind the separate corporate personality of ship-owning companies to their controlling interests and, on the basis of common control, providing that ships are associated. This status subjects them to arrest both in order to obtain security for court proceedings or arbitration, usually elsewhere than in South Africa, and arrest in actions in rem against the associated ship. This is in respect of claims arising in respect of other vessels in separate ownership. Although tentative consideration was given to a similar innovation when the Australian Law Commission undertook a review of admiralty law in Australia their legislation is confined to a surrogate ship arrest substantially along the lines of the sister ship arrest of the Arrest Convention. A proposal to introduce a similar institution by way of the revision of the Arrest Convention has not yet resulted in anything similar being introduced elsewhere. In South African maritime practice the associated ship jurisdiction has proved to be an important innovation, especially in conjunction with the power to arrest a ship for the purpose of obtaining security for proceedings in a foreign court or arbitration tribunal, and a substantial amount of maritime work involves associated ships. As an institution it has not hitherto been subjected to close scrutiny and the overall purpose of this work is to do that. It takes as a starting point the revision of South African admiralty procedure and jurisdiction leading to the enactment of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act and the introduction of the associated ship. This task has been undertaken against the background of the general development of maritime law, the attachment ad fundandam et confirmandam jurisdictionem under the Roman Dutch common law of South Africa and the action in rem available in South Africa under the Colonial Courts of Admiralty Act 1890. The study reveals the common roots of these institutions in the Roman Law and the practice in maritime courts around Europe from the Middle Ages onwards and forms a part of the foundation for the proposition in the final analysis that South Africa has created an institution that is distinct from the English action in rem and having its own particular features derived from both its English and Roman Dutch forebears. The central analysis explores from a critical standpoint the justifications advanced at the time for the introduction of the associated ship jurisdiction and finds these wanting notwithstanding that they have tended to linger in statements in the judgments of the courts. Instead a policy-based justification is advanced that it is submitted provides a proper justification for the associated ship jurisdiction in the South African context. Being based upon policy considerations it is not suggested that this justification is universally applicable or demands the same response from all nations, as each will be influenced by different factors depending on the nature of the maritime interests of the country considering such an institution. This is likely to hamper attempts to obtain international agreement on a similar jurisdiction to arrest vessels going beyond the provisions of the Arrest Convention. In the light of the suggested justification of the associated ship jurisdiction the Act itself is analysed and various difficulties of interpretation are addressed. These include a critical analysis of certain controversial decisions and a consideration of the constitutional implications of the associated ship. Finally the different threads are brought together in an analysis of the nature and consequences of the arrest of an associated ship and the action in rem against the associated ship. The fact that the jurisdiction has been harnessed to two distinct purposes having entirely different features is highlighted. Although maritime law always has a significant international dimension the fact that the associated ship is a uniquely South African institution means that the analysis is largely driven by the underlying principles of South African law and principles. The view is taken that the statute is a South African statute governing matters of the jurisdiction of South African courts and as such falls to be construed in the light of South African legal principles. The too ready resort on questions of interpretation (as opposed to substantive law where it is mandated as being the / Thesis (LL. D.)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, 2010.

No abstract available. / Thesis (LL.M.)-University of Natal, Durban, 1986.

No abstract available. / Thesis (LL.M.)-University of Natal, Durban, 1994.