does not prevent it from being a “transboundary harm”.
80 The question is if the
responsibility is linked to the breach of the obligation of prevention and/or to the
objective damage.
81
Under the current framework, a coastal state with an extended CS could only
regulate the activities of other states on the high seas if those states have given their
consent. They could do that either specifically (acceptance of a specific measure) or
generally (acceptance of the coastal state’s power to adopt such measures), and either
individually (each state) or multilaterally (multilateral treaty and/or within the
framework of an international organisation).
In the North East Atlantic, there are MPAs including the extended CSs (claimed
or effective) of Portugal
82 and the United Kingdom.
83 Furthermore, one MPA was
divided in two precisely so as not to include the CS claimed by Iceland.
84 The
applicable framework is OSPAR. The MPAs assigned to coastal states include the
CS,
85 whilst the MPAs assigned to all OSPAR states include the water column (high
seas).
86 In this latter case, the consent of the corresponding coastal state has been
obtained.
87 It is important to point out this since there is a concern regarding
potential conflicts between the coastal state’s powers over the extended CS and the
80 “Art. 2: (. . .) (c) “transboundary harm” means harm caused in the territory of or in other places
under the jurisdiction or control of a State other than the State of origin, whether or not the States
concerned share a common border”, ibid.
81 As regards the damage caused between Member States, see: “The principles on the allocation of
loss in the case of transboundary harm arising out of hazardous activities”, annexed to United
Nations General Assembly Resolution 61/36 (2006).
82 Portugal had designated 17 MPAs under the OSPAR framework. Five of them have a special
status. On the one hand, four cover an area that Portugal has submitted as extended CS to the
Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. These MPAs are: the Altair Seamount High
Seas MPA, the Antialtair Seamount High Seas MPA, the Josephine Seamount High Seas MPA, and
the Atlantic Ridge North of the Azores High Seas MPA. These four MPAs have been assigned to all
contracting parties (category “beyond the EEZ”). Additionally, another of these 17 MPAs is located
in the Portuguese CS, including extended CS (Rainbow Hydrothermal Vent Field). This MPA has
been assigned to Portugal (category “beyond the EEZ”). The area of this MPA located beyond
Portugal’s EEZ is 22 km
2
. OSPAR Commission (2019), p. 9. On the Portuguese experience, see:
Ribeiro (2014), pp. 194–207.
83 The United Kingdom had designated 311 MPAs under the OSPAR framework. Three of them
have a special status. Two of these are situated in the extended CS (Hatton Bank SAC, HattonRockall Basin). They have been assigned to the United Kingdom (category “beyond the EEZ”).
Another is partially located in the EEZ and partially in the extended British CS (North West Rockall
Bank SAC). It has been assigned to the United Kingdom (category “EEZ” and also “beyond the
EEZ”). The area beyond the EEZ is about 17.158 km
2
. OSPAR Commission (2019), p. 9.
84 Both MPAs have been assigned to all states. The northern one (Charlie Gibbs North High Seas
MPA) includes only the waters. The southern one (Charlie Gibbs South High Seas MPA) includes
waters and sea bottom.
85 Rainbow Hydrothermal Vent Field; Hatton Bank SAC; Hatton-Rockall Basin. As far as the North
West Rockall Bank SAC is concerned, it includes the waters, but from the EEZ.
86 Smith and Jabour (2018), p. 421.
87 Ribeiro (2017b), pp. 756–757.
458
M. Sobrido-Prieto
80 The question is if the
responsibility is linked to the breach of the obligation of prevention and/or to the
objective damage.
81
Under the current framework, a coastal state with an extended CS could only
regulate the activities of other states on the high seas if those states have given their
consent. They could do that either specifically (acceptance of a specific measure) or
generally (acceptance of the coastal state’s power to adopt such measures), and either
individually (each state) or multilaterally (multilateral treaty and/or within the
framework of an international organisation).
In the North East Atlantic, there are MPAs including the extended CSs (claimed
or effective) of Portugal
82 and the United Kingdom.
83 Furthermore, one MPA was
divided in two precisely so as not to include the CS claimed by Iceland.
84 The
applicable framework is OSPAR. The MPAs assigned to coastal states include the
CS,
85 whilst the MPAs assigned to all OSPAR states include the water column (high
seas).
86 In this latter case, the consent of the corresponding coastal state has been
obtained.
87 It is important to point out this since there is a concern regarding
potential conflicts between the coastal state’s powers over the extended CS and the
80 “Art. 2: (. . .) (c) “transboundary harm” means harm caused in the territory of or in other places
under the jurisdiction or control of a State other than the State of origin, whether or not the States
concerned share a common border”, ibid.
81 As regards the damage caused between Member States, see: “The principles on the allocation of
loss in the case of transboundary harm arising out of hazardous activities”, annexed to United
Nations General Assembly Resolution 61/36 (2006).
82 Portugal had designated 17 MPAs under the OSPAR framework. Five of them have a special
status. On the one hand, four cover an area that Portugal has submitted as extended CS to the
Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. These MPAs are: the Altair Seamount High
Seas MPA, the Antialtair Seamount High Seas MPA, the Josephine Seamount High Seas MPA, and
the Atlantic Ridge North of the Azores High Seas MPA. These four MPAs have been assigned to all
contracting parties (category “beyond the EEZ”). Additionally, another of these 17 MPAs is located
in the Portuguese CS, including extended CS (Rainbow Hydrothermal Vent Field). This MPA has
been assigned to Portugal (category “beyond the EEZ”). The area of this MPA located beyond
Portugal’s EEZ is 22 km
2
. OSPAR Commission (2019), p. 9. On the Portuguese experience, see:
Ribeiro (2014), pp. 194–207.
83 The United Kingdom had designated 311 MPAs under the OSPAR framework. Three of them
have a special status. Two of these are situated in the extended CS (Hatton Bank SAC, HattonRockall Basin). They have been assigned to the United Kingdom (category “beyond the EEZ”).
Another is partially located in the EEZ and partially in the extended British CS (North West Rockall
Bank SAC). It has been assigned to the United Kingdom (category “EEZ” and also “beyond the
EEZ”). The area beyond the EEZ is about 17.158 km
2
. OSPAR Commission (2019), p. 9.
84 Both MPAs have been assigned to all states. The northern one (Charlie Gibbs North High Seas
MPA) includes only the waters. The southern one (Charlie Gibbs South High Seas MPA) includes
waters and sea bottom.
85 Rainbow Hydrothermal Vent Field; Hatton Bank SAC; Hatton-Rockall Basin. As far as the North
West Rockall Bank SAC is concerned, it includes the waters, but from the EEZ.
86 Smith and Jabour (2018), p. 421.
87 Ribeiro (2017b), pp. 756–757.
458
M. Sobrido-Prieto