2011bepress Legal RepositoryOpen access

Stability of Maritime Boundary Agreements

Julia Lisztwan

Open full text 17 citations

Abstract

This Note examines the relationship between coastal geography changes and maritime entitlements under international law. It argues that, despite considerable recent concern that negotiated settlements will not be able to cope with the effects of global climate change, current law is robust enough to accommodate these changes. Despite the lack of textual provision in UNCLOS, state practice has, arguably, accommodated ambulatory baselines. Moreover, the author maintains that changing coastlines will not lead to instability. They are not likely to be held to invalidate negotiated treaties under the principle of rebus sic stantibus, nor are they likely to create new rights for third parties under pacta tertiis. Since neither judicial decision nor state practice will likely alter existing rights and obligations, the Note concludes that changing baselines will not have the destabilizing effects that some commentators foresee.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This Note examines the relationship between coastal geography changes and maritime entitlements under international law. It argues that, despite considerable recent concern that negotiated settlements will not be able to cope with the effects of global climate change, current law is robust enough to accommodate these changes. Despite the lack of textual provision in UNCLOS, state practice has, arguably, accommodated ambulatory baselines. Moreover, the author maintains that changing coastlines will not lead to instability. They are not likely to be held to invalidate negotiated treaties under the principle of rebus sic stantibus, nor are they likely to create new rights for third parties under pacta tertiis. Since neither judicial decision nor state practice will likely alter existing rights and obligations, the Note concludes that changing baselines will not have the destabilizing effects that some commentators foresee.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 17 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This Note examines the relationship between coastal geography changes and maritime entitlements under international law. It argues that, despite considerable recent concern that negotiated settlements will not be able to cope with the effects of global climate change, current law is robust enough to accommodate these changes. Despite the lack of textual provision in UNCLOS, state practice has, arguably, accommodated ambulatory baselines. Moreover, the author maintains that changing coastlines will not lead to instability. They are not likely to be held to invalidate negotiated treaties under the principle of rebus sic stantibus, nor are they likely to create new rights for third parties under pacta tertiis. Since neither judicial decision nor state practice will likely alter existing rights and obligations, the Note concludes that changing baselines will not have the destabilizing effects that some commentators foresee.

Key concepts: Maritime boundary, Freedom of navigation, United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Law of the sea, Sovereignty, Convention, Law, Treaty

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Stability of Maritime Boundary Agreements — Research Paper | ScholarLens