English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The article argues that the Law of the Sea Convention’s ( LOSC ) dispute settlement system ( DSS ) is attuned only to certain types of disputes (bilateral) and does not allow for the effective enforcement of obligations  erga omnes  reflected in the Convention. Mechanisms established to address enforcement of communitarian norms specifically are scarce in international law and the traditional bilateral structure of adjudicatory dispute settlement circumscribes the ability of states to act as advocates of the international community to which obligations  erga omnes  are owed. The article identifies the obligations  erga omnes  reflected in the  LOSC  and assesses the extent to which its dispute settlement framework is suited to address their breach. It is submitted that some of the community interest obligations of the  LOSC  are “left behind” by the function of the system itself.

No Provision Left Behind – Law of the Sea Convention’s Dispute Settlement System and Obligations Erga Omnes