Advanced

Flag state vs. coastal state- jurisdictional challenges regarding shipping operations affiliated with activities in the Norwegian petroleum sector

Karlsson, Pontus LU (2011) JURM01 20111
Department of Law
Abstract
This thesis provides a study of the coastal state jurisdiction over the continental shelf. The study is limited to exploration and exploitation of subsoil petroleum deposits as well as the activities affiliated with this.
There is a problem of overlapping, or conflicting jurisdictional competence, in situations where the law of the flag state applies in regard to the vessels involved in the petroleum activities on the continental shelf of a foreign state. This overlap or conflict is strengthened by factors such as the increasing use of different types of vessels and diversity of services that is currently meeting the needs of the offshore industry.
After studying the Norwegian approach to this situation, it becomes clear that Norway has... (More)
This thesis provides a study of the coastal state jurisdiction over the continental shelf. The study is limited to exploration and exploitation of subsoil petroleum deposits as well as the activities affiliated with this.
There is a problem of overlapping, or conflicting jurisdictional competence, in situations where the law of the flag state applies in regard to the vessels involved in the petroleum activities on the continental shelf of a foreign state. This overlap or conflict is strengthened by factors such as the increasing use of different types of vessels and diversity of services that is currently meeting the needs of the offshore industry.
After studying the Norwegian approach to this situation, it becomes clear that Norway has a soft approach to the use of the possibility of jurisdiction based on activity; the possibility is not utilized to its full extent.
This has been a strategy for the purpose not to infringe the freedoms of Norway’s own vessels that are deployed in waters where foreign jurisdictions would strengthen the status of their own national legislation if these states were to act in the same way. If that scenario would come true, it would fit the description that there is a developing tendency to assert ever-greater claims over the high seas, described by Shaw. Contribution to this trend is thus avoided by the state of Norway.
There is however one area where Norwegian authorities seem to take a greater freedom in determining the rules for the vessels within reach of the activity based jurisdiction, and that is the area of safety. Kaasen has described this approach in relation to offshore activities. An ‘elastic test’ has been introduced by Krokeide as an instrument to determine the jurisdictional competence of the coastal state of vessels of certain types and in certain operations in relation to certain legal areas.
The author of this essay takes the perspective as to how the problem of jurisdiction should be dealt with in an international level. There are good reasons for establishing a pattern among coastal states to achieve higher security standards in a wide scope of vessels and activities offshore. Thereby positive synergic effects will sort out many of the dynamic challenges that arise from today’s internationally differential and nationally dualistic approach.
It is in the opinion of the author that an international convention, governing the jurisdiction based on activity, is the best solution for the issue of overlapping jurisdictions in the long run, but this is not without problems. Classification societies may also have a role to play. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Karlsson, Pontus LU
supervisor
organization
course
JURM01 20111
year
type
H2 - Master's Degree (Two Years)
subject
keywords
jurisdiction petroleum coastal state flag overlap conflict norway
language
English
id
1974254
date added to LUP
2011-06-09 11:02:54
date last changed
2011-06-09 11:02:54
@misc{1974254,
  abstract     = {This thesis provides a study of the coastal state jurisdiction over the continental shelf. The study is limited to exploration and exploitation of subsoil petroleum deposits as well as the activities affiliated with this.
There is a problem of overlapping, or conflicting jurisdictional competence, in situations where the law of the flag state applies in regard to the vessels involved in the petroleum activities on the continental shelf of a foreign state. This overlap or conflict is strengthened by factors such as the increasing use of different types of vessels and diversity of services that is currently meeting the needs of the offshore industry.
After studying the Norwegian approach to this situation, it becomes clear that Norway has a soft approach to the use of the possibility of jurisdiction based on activity; the possibility is not utilized to its full extent. 
This has been a strategy for the purpose not to infringe the freedoms of Norway’s own vessels that are deployed in waters where foreign jurisdictions would strengthen the status of their own national legislation if these states were to act in the same way. If that scenario would come true, it would fit the description that there is a developing tendency to assert ever-greater claims over the high seas, described by Shaw.  Contribution to this trend is thus avoided by the state of Norway.
There is however one area where Norwegian authorities seem to take a greater freedom in determining the rules for the vessels within reach of the activity based jurisdiction, and that is the area of safety. Kaasen has described this approach in relation to offshore activities.  An ‘elastic test’ has been introduced by Krokeide as an instrument to determine the jurisdictional competence of the coastal state of vessels of certain types and in certain operations in relation to certain legal areas.
The author of this essay takes the perspective as to how the problem of jurisdiction should be dealt with in an international level. There are good reasons for establishing a pattern among coastal states to achieve higher security standards in a wide scope of vessels and activities offshore. Thereby positive synergic effects will sort out many of the dynamic challenges that arise from today’s internationally differential and nationally dualistic approach.
It is in the opinion of the author that an international convention, governing the jurisdiction based on activity, is the best solution for the issue of overlapping jurisdictions in the long run, but this is not without problems. Classification societies may also have a role to play.},
  author       = {Karlsson, Pontus},
  keyword      = {jurisdiction petroleum coastal state flag overlap conflict norway},
  language     = {eng},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Flag state vs. coastal state- jurisdictional challenges regarding shipping operations affiliated with activities in the Norwegian petroleum sector},
  year         = {2011},
}