Abstract:
Equity has an important role in fulfilling lack of rules in continental shelf.Equity and developments of this principle in delimitation of the continental shelf is indebted to judicial procedure which International Court of Justice in its judicial procedure has presented it with different approaches that has clear crystallized it and has provided high potency of it in absence of rules. In this research, development of equity in delimitation of the continental shelf from judicial decisions perspectives have been investigated and by reasoning in international court decisions, it was determined that international judicial decisions in presentation and progressive development has had a vital role in the principle discussed and by considering Equity of results-oriented and its reform approach and with employing new Modified Equity approach of has make ruling, development and making it more practical in delimitation in the zone mentioned.
Machine summary:
The principle of equity, among the principles and sources of international law, due to its flexibility in dry legal rules and facilitating the work of judicial and arbitration authorities in resolving disputes referred to them, the easier acceptance of legal subjects to rulings based on it, and also the trend towards the development of this principle in international law, has a special position (Pakdel, 1390: 1) and for this reason it has also been used in determining the boundaries of the continental shelf and the exclusive economic zone.
This principle is mentioned 32 times in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and specifically in the field of delimiting maritime areas and the continental shelf, and was accepted in part 99 of the Gulf of Maine case 1, and in the transition of its historical path, it was expanded in the form of decisions of the International Court of Justice in the Tunisia-Libya case (71 .
As mentioned, this is the method called the corrective equity approach, and its basis is the modification and change in the fair or midpoint line, based on “special circumstances,” which was emphasized in this judgment by borrowing from the arbitral award in the case of the English and French Continental Shelf2 and in this regard, the Court stated that it is not surprising if a fair line based on the rule of “special circumstances,” when applied to opposite coasts, yields more similar results as fair principles of related circumstances, which can be exemplified in maritime areas such as fishing zones or shared boundaries or the continental shelf.
(
, 
, 
)
