The Southern Bluefin Tuna Arbitral Tribunal Did Get It Right: A Commentary and Reply to the Article by David A. Colson and Dr. Peggy Hoyle

Author: KWIATKOWSK B.

Source: Ocean Development and International Law, Volume 34, Numbers 3-4, Numbers 3-4/July-December 2003 , pp. 369-395(27)

Publisher: Taylor and Francis Ltd

Buy & download fulltext article:

Price: $50.43 plus tax (Refund Policy)

Abstract:

This contribution is a reply to and a commentary on the article by David A. Colson and Dr. Peggy Hoyle, "Satisfying the Procedural Prerequisites to the Compulsory Dispute Settlement Mechanisms of the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention: Did the Southern Bluefin Tuna Tribunal Get It Right?" 34(1) Ocean Development & International Law 59-82 (2003). Colson and Hoyle took the view that Southern Bluefin Tuna Tribunal did not reach the correct answer. The author's survey of the Southern Bluefin Tuna and the Mox Plant cases, in light of the doctrine of procedural and substantive parallelism between the umbrella UN Law of the Sea Convention and its numerous implementing special treaties covered by Articles 281-282, leads her to conclude that the Southern Bluefin Tuna Arbitral Tribunal did get it right.

Document Type: Research article

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00908320390229003

Affiliations: 1: Netherlands Institute for the Law of the Sea, Faculty of Law, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Publication date: 2003-07-01