295
These judgments were handed down as a result of various types of actions,
namely: fourteen references for a preliminary ruling,
59
seven actions for annulment,
60
four failures of a Member State to fulfil its obligations,
61
and one action for damages.
62
Additionally, an appeal was brought before the Court of Justice regarding the
judgment of the General Court in a case of an action for annulment in the field of
agriculture and fisheries. However, this appeal will not be taken into account for the
purposes of this study of ECJ case law on UNCLOS as it did not explicitly refer to
any provision of this treaty.
63
The UNCLOS provisions that have already been mentioned or analysed in ECJ
case law affect the following main fields:
– The high seas/navigation in the high seas/the nationality and legal status of ships/
the duties of flag states in the high seas: Articles 91(1), 92(1), 93(1)-(3), 97(1)
and (2) UNCLOS were invoked in the following judgments: Poulsen and Diva
Navigation (1992)
64
; Colegio de Oficiales de la Marina Mercante Española
(2003)
65
; Anker and others (2003)
66
; Commission v. Italy (2005)
67
; Stroumpoulis
and others (2016).
68
– Delimitation of marine areas: Articles 5, 7 and 13 UNCLOS regarding the normal and straight baselines were mentioned in the following judgments:
Commission v. United Kingdom (1991)
69
; Armand Mondiet (1993)
70
; and
Intertanko and others (2008).
71
Various other judgments also make reference to
59 In the fields of: agriculture and fisheries (2 cases); social policy (4 cases); transport (2 cases); the
environment (2 cases); taxation (1 case); the free movement of workers (2 cases); and the Brussels
Convention (1 case).
60 In the fields of: agriculture and fisheries (2 cases); institutional provisions (2 cases); external
relations/Common Foreign and Security Policy (2 cases); and the area of freedom, security and
justice (1 case).
61 In the fields of: agriculture and fisheries (1 case); the principles, objectives and missions of the
EU’s treaties (1 case); non-discrimination/non-discrimination by nationality (1 case); and social
policy (1 case).
62 In the field of agriculture and fisheries (1 case).
63 On 10 December 2015, the General Court delivered its judgment in the Front Polisario v. Council
case. Two months later, the Council brought an appeal against this judgment before the Court of
Justice (Council v. Front Polisario, C-104/16P, EU:C:2016:973). On 21 December 2016, the Court
of Justice published its judgment regarding this appeal, setting aside the judgment of the General
Court in the case T-512/12 and dismissing the action brought by the Front Polisario as
inadmissible.
64 Poulsen and Diva Navigation, paras 13–16 and 18.
65 Colegio de Oficiales de la Marina Mercante Española, paras 6–7 and 46.
66 Anker and others, paras 4–5.
67 Commission v. Italy, paras 54–55.
68 Stroumpoulis and others, paras 27 and 64–66.
69 Commission v. United Kingdom, paras 2–4.
70 Mondiet, paras 13–15.
71 Intertanko and others, para. 51.
The European Court of Justice and the Interpretation of the United Nations Convention…
These judgments were handed down as a result of various types of actions,
namely: fourteen references for a preliminary ruling,
59
seven actions for annulment,
60
four failures of a Member State to fulfil its obligations,
61
and one action for damages.
62
Additionally, an appeal was brought before the Court of Justice regarding the
judgment of the General Court in a case of an action for annulment in the field of
agriculture and fisheries. However, this appeal will not be taken into account for the
purposes of this study of ECJ case law on UNCLOS as it did not explicitly refer to
any provision of this treaty.
63
The UNCLOS provisions that have already been mentioned or analysed in ECJ
case law affect the following main fields:
– The high seas/navigation in the high seas/the nationality and legal status of ships/
the duties of flag states in the high seas: Articles 91(1), 92(1), 93(1)-(3), 97(1)
and (2) UNCLOS were invoked in the following judgments: Poulsen and Diva
Navigation (1992)
64
; Colegio de Oficiales de la Marina Mercante Española
(2003)
65
; Anker and others (2003)
66
; Commission v. Italy (2005)
67
; Stroumpoulis
and others (2016).
68
– Delimitation of marine areas: Articles 5, 7 and 13 UNCLOS regarding the normal and straight baselines were mentioned in the following judgments:
Commission v. United Kingdom (1991)
69
; Armand Mondiet (1993)
70
; and
Intertanko and others (2008).
71
Various other judgments also make reference to
59 In the fields of: agriculture and fisheries (2 cases); social policy (4 cases); transport (2 cases); the
environment (2 cases); taxation (1 case); the free movement of workers (2 cases); and the Brussels
Convention (1 case).
60 In the fields of: agriculture and fisheries (2 cases); institutional provisions (2 cases); external
relations/Common Foreign and Security Policy (2 cases); and the area of freedom, security and
justice (1 case).
61 In the fields of: agriculture and fisheries (1 case); the principles, objectives and missions of the
EU’s treaties (1 case); non-discrimination/non-discrimination by nationality (1 case); and social
policy (1 case).
62 In the field of agriculture and fisheries (1 case).
63 On 10 December 2015, the General Court delivered its judgment in the Front Polisario v. Council
case. Two months later, the Council brought an appeal against this judgment before the Court of
Justice (Council v. Front Polisario, C-104/16P, EU:C:2016:973). On 21 December 2016, the Court
of Justice published its judgment regarding this appeal, setting aside the judgment of the General
Court in the case T-512/12 and dismissing the action brought by the Front Polisario as
inadmissible.
64 Poulsen and Diva Navigation, paras 13–16 and 18.
65 Colegio de Oficiales de la Marina Mercante Española, paras 6–7 and 46.
66 Anker and others, paras 4–5.
67 Commission v. Italy, paras 54–55.
68 Stroumpoulis and others, paras 27 and 64–66.
69 Commission v. United Kingdom, paras 2–4.
70 Mondiet, paras 13–15.
71 Intertanko and others, para. 51.
The European Court of Justice and the Interpretation of the United Nations Convention…