107
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019
A. Del Vecchio, R. Virzo (eds.), Interpretations of the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea by International Courts and Tribunals,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10773-4_7
The Requirement of Urgency
in the Jurisprudence of ITLOS Concerning
Provisional Measures
Yoshifumi Tanaka
Abstract The aim of this article is to examine the requirement of urgency in the
jurisprudence of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) concerning provisional measures. The requirement of urgency is at the heart of the institution of provisional measures. Nonetheless, ITLOS is not uniform with regard to the
requirement of urgency when prescribing provisional measures. In this regard, an
issue at point concerns a temporal standard to determine the existence of urgency in
a particular case. A time-frame for determining urgency is contextual and it may
vary in different contexts. This article identifies two types of urgency: urgency as
imminence and urgency as process. Normally the concept of urgency in international law is connected to imminent danger or risk. In certain contexts of conservation of marine living resources and marine environmental protection, however, the
concept of urgency is not synonymous with imminence but concerns the prevention
of a trend of decline toward a collapse of fish stocks concerned or further degradation of the marine environment. The concept of urgency in the context of conservation of marine living resources and protection of the marine environment from
certain pollution must be considered as a process to prevent further decline of the
fish stock concerned or deterioration of the marine environment.
1 Introduction
The passage of time creates particular sensitivity associated with the interpretation
and application of rules of the international law and the international law of the sea
is no exception. While consideration of time elements may be at issue in various
aspects of the law of the sea, this article focuses on time elements reflected in the
requirement of urgency in provisional measures in the jurisprudence of International
Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS). Provisional measures occupy an important
Y. Tanaka (*)
University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Law, Copenhagen, Denmark
e-mail: yoshifumi.tanaka@jur.ku.dk
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019
A. Del Vecchio, R. Virzo (eds.), Interpretations of the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea by International Courts and Tribunals,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10773-4_7
The Requirement of Urgency
in the Jurisprudence of ITLOS Concerning
Provisional Measures
Yoshifumi Tanaka
Abstract The aim of this article is to examine the requirement of urgency in the
jurisprudence of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) concerning provisional measures. The requirement of urgency is at the heart of the institution of provisional measures. Nonetheless, ITLOS is not uniform with regard to the
requirement of urgency when prescribing provisional measures. In this regard, an
issue at point concerns a temporal standard to determine the existence of urgency in
a particular case. A time-frame for determining urgency is contextual and it may
vary in different contexts. This article identifies two types of urgency: urgency as
imminence and urgency as process. Normally the concept of urgency in international law is connected to imminent danger or risk. In certain contexts of conservation of marine living resources and marine environmental protection, however, the
concept of urgency is not synonymous with imminence but concerns the prevention
of a trend of decline toward a collapse of fish stocks concerned or further degradation of the marine environment. The concept of urgency in the context of conservation of marine living resources and protection of the marine environment from
certain pollution must be considered as a process to prevent further decline of the
fish stock concerned or deterioration of the marine environment.
1 Introduction
The passage of time creates particular sensitivity associated with the interpretation
and application of rules of the international law and the international law of the sea
is no exception. While consideration of time elements may be at issue in various
aspects of the law of the sea, this article focuses on time elements reflected in the
requirement of urgency in provisional measures in the jurisprudence of International
Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS). Provisional measures occupy an important
Y. Tanaka (*)
University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Law, Copenhagen, Denmark
e-mail: yoshifumi.tanaka@jur.ku.dk