In implementation of article 287 of the United Nations Convention for the Law of the Sea, the Government of Italy has the honour to declare that, for the settlement of disputes concerning the application or interpretation of the Convention and of the Agreement adopted on 28 July 1994 relating to the Implementation of Part XI, it chooses the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the International Court of Justice, without specifying that one has precedence over the other.
In making this declaration under article 287 of the Convention on the Law of the Sea, Italy is reaffirming its confidence in the existing judicial organs. In accordance with article 287, paragraph 4, of the Convention Italy considers that it has chosen "the same procedure" as any other State Party that has chosen the International Tribunal for the Law of the sea or the International Court of Justice.
In accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 287 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of December 10th, 1982, the Government of the Republic of Panama declares that it accepts the competence and jurisdiction of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea for the settlement of the dispute between the Government of the Republic of Panama and the Government of the Italian Republic concerning the interpretation and application of UNCLOS that arose from the detention of the Motor Tanker NORSTAR, flying the Panamanian flag.
The Application of Panama of 16 December 2015 reads:
Accordingly, Applicant requests the Tribunal to adjudge and declare that:
1. Respondent has violated articles 33, 73(3) and (4), 87, 111, 226 and 300 of the Convention.
2. Applicant is entitled to damages as proven in the case on the merits which are provisionally estimated in Ten Million and 00/100 US Dollars ($10,000,000); and
3. Applicant is entitled to all attorney's fees, costs and incidental expenses.
To enable the Tribunal to determine whether it has jurisdiction, it must establish a link between the facts advanced by Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and the provisions of the Convention referred to by it and show that such provisions can sustain the claim or claims submitted by Saint Vincent and the Grenadines.
The Tribunal notes that article 87 of the Convention deals with the freedom of the high seas, in particular the freedom of navigation, which applies to the high seas and, under article 58 of the Convention, to the exclusive economic zone... Article 87 cannot be interpreted in such a way as to grant the M/V "Louisa" a right to leave the port and gain access to the high seas notwithstanding its detention in the context of legal proceedings against it.
[t]his claim is not one of diplomatic protection, nor is it espousal or based on indirect violations. Rather, Panama contends that the present case is one involving a direct violation of its rights accorded by the Convention and, as a consequence of those violations, damages inflicted must be compensated.
Already registered ?