- The relevant words are: “Any installations or structures which are abandoned or disused shall be removed to ensure safety of navigation, taking into account any generally accepted international standards established in this regard by the competent international organisation. Such removal shall also have due regard to fishing, the protection of the marine environment and the rights and duties of other states. Appropriate publicity shall be given to the depth, position and dimensions of any installations or structures not entirely removed.” Art. 60, para. 3. is considered not to apply to pipelines.
- H.C. Official Record. Standing Committee B. December 9. 1986, cols. 87 and 88.
- H.C. Official Report, Standing Committee B. February 11. 1987, col. 382.
- H.C. Official Report. Standing Committee B. January 20. (Part II), col. 382.
- H.C. Official Report, Standing Committee B, January 13, 1987, col. 244.
- Similar criminal penalties exist for breaches of duties in relation to offshore installations under the Mineral Workings (Offshore Installations) Act 1971.
- There are a number of precedents in other legislation for this type of clause, including the six week time limit on the right to seek a remedy. Examples are s.23 of the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 and s.244 and 245 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971.
- See Anisminic Ltd. v. Foreign Compensation Commission [1969] 1 All E.R. 208 (H.L.) in particular Lord Reid at pp. 213–214A; also dicta of Lord Denning in Ashbridge v. Minister of Housing [1965] 3 All E.R. 374 C and D.
- Associated Provincial Picture Houses v. Wednesbury Corporation [1947] 2 All E.R. 680.
- [1956] 1 All E.R. 855 (H.L.).
- H.C. Official Record, February 11, 1987, col. 403.
Journal of Energy & Natural Resources Law
Volume 5, 1987 - Issue 3