- Trail Smelter Arbitration (US v Canada) 3 RIIA 1905.
- Articles 1 and 2, Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf, 1958.
- Article 5(1).
- Article 5(2), which refers back to Article 5(1).
- Article 5(5).
- Blanche Sas, “An Update on the Legal Aspects of Offshore Abandonment”, IBC Conference on Decommissioning and Removal of Oil Structures, 19–20 April 1989, P 2.
- This was the test enunciated by the International Court of Justice, in respect of another clause, in the North Sea Continental Shelf Cases, ICJ Reports (1969) 3 at 43–45.
- See Cameron and Roggenkamp. 10 JENRL (1992)21 at 22
- See Redgwell, 10 JENRL (1992) 59 at 82.
- See ED Brown, “Decommissioning of Offshore Structures: Legal Obligations under International Law and Municipal Law” (1982) 1 Oil and Petrochemical Pollution at 25.
- Article 31(1) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
- Including the UK Government. See, eg Hansard, House of Lords 11 February 1987.
- Article 31(1) Vienna Convention. Nor do the other provisions in the Vienna Convention on the interpretation of treaties lead to a different conclusion. Recourse may be had to supplementary means of interpretation if interpretation by reference to the ordinary meaning in the light of the treaty's objects and purpose would lead to “an absurd result”. But vast costs are not what is meant by “an absurd result”. And in any event, recourse to supplementary means of interpretation, such as the travaux préparatoires, was what was intended in 1958. My views here are the same as those of McDade, “The International Law of Abandonment of Offshore Installations”, 6 OGLTR 1985/6, 291; and Sas, op cil, p 3.
- ICJ Reports (1974) 3 at 36.
- There is also a general provision under Article 194 which requires states to take all necessary measures to ensure that activities under their jurisdiction or control are so conducted as not to cause damage to other states and their environment. Thus the specific provisions on abandonment continue to be a lex specialis that nonetheless has to be read alongside these general provisions. They do not of themselves dispose of the matters covered in Article 194, though the terms of Article 60(3) allude to them.
- See M Twyman, “Abandonment—UK Government Policy—An Update”, 6 OGLTR (1991) 188.
- In fact, Article (a) of the IMO Convention lists as its purpose “to encourage and facilitate the general adoption of the highest practicable standards in matters concerning the maritime safety, efficiency of navigation and prevention and control of pollution from ships”—elements which could come into play if collision with an abandoned platform occurred.
- LDC/11/8/1 9 August 1988.
- See eg LDC 13/7 28 August 1990; LDC 13/INF/18 25 September 1990; LDC/13/15, 18 December 1990; LDC/LG 5/10 7 August 1991.
- See Report of Fifth Meeting of the Ad Hoc Group of Legal Experts on Dumping.
- Seventeenth Meeting of the Oslo Commission, 10–12 June 1991, Annex 5, Ref 7.8.
- See C Fulghum, “Big Oil Over A Barrel: Retiring Rigs to Reefs”, Business and Society Review, Fall 1988, 22.
- LDC 14/16 30 December 1991, para 5.11.
- eg B Sas, “Legal Aspects of Decommissioning of Submarine Pipelines on the United Kingdom Continental Shelf”, 1 OGLTR (1987/8) 11.
- See, eg, Fisher, “Abandonment of Oil and Gas Installations: The Background” in Daintith (ed), Recent Developments in United Kingdom Petroleum Law (1981) para 2.3, fn 16.
- See Report of the Fifth Meeting of the Ad Hoc Group of Legal Experts on Dumping, IMO, LDC/LG 5/10 7 August 1991.
Journal of Energy & Natural Resources Law
Volume 11, 1993 - Issue 1