North Sea Continental Shelf Cases Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained

Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► www.quimbee.co...
North Sea Continental Shelf Cases | 1969 I.C.J. 3
Under international law, the portion of a continental shelf adjacent to a state’s coastline is considered a natural extension of its land territory. This entitles the state to exclusive rights over that part of the shelf and the natural resources it contains. However, neighboring coastal states frequently assert overlapping claims to portions of a shared continental shelf. The International Court of Justice delivered its first judgment on continental-shelf boundary disputes in the North Sea Continental Shelf Cases.
Germany, Denmark, and the Netherlands have adjacent coastlines along the North Sea. Negotiations to divide a shared portion of the North Sea continental shelf led to a series of disputes. Denmark and the Netherlands agreed the states should apply the equidistance method to deliminate boundary lines. This approach would entitle each state to the portions of the continental shelf closer to its coastline than to the coasts of the other two states.
Germany refused to employ the equidistance method. Based on the curve of its North Sea coastline, boundary lines based on equidistance would entitle Germany to a disproportionately small section of the shelf compared to alternative delimitation methods.
After subsequent attempts at negotiations failed, the states agreed to submit their disputes to the International Court of Justice.
Germany argued that it was entitled to an equitable share of the continental shelf and that the boundary lines should be proportional to the length of each state’s coastline.
Denmark and the Netherlands argued that under Article Six of the Geneva Convention of Nineteen Fifty-Eight on the Continental Shelf, boundary lines are determined by the equidistance method unless special circumstances justify another boundary line. They asserted that although Germany hadn’t ratified the convention, it was still bound to delimit the continental shelf using the equidistance method because it was a rule of customary international law.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: www.quimbee.co...
The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► www.quimbee.co...
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: www.quimbee.co...
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our RUclips Channel ► www.youtube.co...
Quimbee Case Brief App ► www.quimbee.co...
Facebook ► / quimbeedotcom
Twitter ► / quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries

[@artistatlaw]

Yes, the video is incomplete everyone--that's because you have to UNLOCK it via a free trial with Quimbee to finish it, as it says at the end, "Unlock this Video"

[@pubududinelka3225]

wtf ?? As i know That's not what ICJ holds

[@eramnesia5347]

I have read this whole case the end of the video is misleading

[@trevorforde1692]

Incomplete

[@_aniiii10]

bruh