ORCID Profile
0000-0001-9838-4302
Current Organisation
UNSW Sydney
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Brill | Nijhoff
Date: 16-12-2018
Publisher: Brill | Nijhoff
Date: 28-12-2011
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 12-2017
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 16-10-2009
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 09-2008
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Date: 2020
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 19-11-2010
Publisher: Brill | Nijhoff
Date: 03-01-2019
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 03-07-2018
Publisher: Brill | Nijhoff
Date: 2014
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 2011
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 04-2006
DOI: 10.1093/ICLQ/LEI084
Abstract: On 14 December 2004, Australia announced the institution of a ‘Maritime Identification Zone’, extending 1000 nautical miles from its coast and involving the identification of vessels seeking to enter Australian ports, as well as vessels transiting Australia' Exclusive Economic Zone. This Article analyses the legality of these security measures under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, new developments through the International Maritime Organization and the Proliferation Security Initiative. The implications of prescribing and enforcing identification requirements on the high seas and in the EEZ, the impact on maritime boundaries and avenues for dispute settlement are all explored.
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 05-06-2014
Publisher: Brill
Date: 2006
DOI: 10.1163/157180806779441129
Abstract: This article examines the interaction under LOSC of the powers of international courts and tribunals to order binding provisional measures and the obligation of states to make every effort to enter into provisional arrangements pending the delimitation of a maritime boundary. The importance of provisional measures or arrangements in delimiting maritime boundaries, previous state and judicial practice related to provisional arrangements and measures, and the relevant substantive and procedural rules under LOSC are all explored as a means of explaining how courts and tribunals should exercise their powers of ordering provisional measures when provisional arrangements are required. It is argued here that an international court or tribunal should exercise caution in order to ensure that the procedural mechanism complements, rather than conflicts with, the substantive obligation. To this end, provisional measures entailing recommendations, duties of cooperation and obligations of non-aggravation are to be preferred.
Publisher: Edward Elgar Publishing
Date: 29-10-2010
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 05-2013
Publisher: Brill
Date: 09-12-2020
DOI: 10.1163/18781527-BJA10003
Abstract: Cruise ships have contributed to the spread of covid -19 around the world and State responses to the pandemic have needed to account for the presence of these ships in their ports and the medical treatment of both passengers and crew on board. This contribution outlines the key bodies of international law that must be brought to bear in deciding on State action in response to cruise ships and their covid -19 cases: the law of the sea, international health law, shipping conventions and especially treaties protecting the rights of seafarers, international human rights law and laws relating to consular assistance. While these laws tend to reinforce each other, it is argued that the need for humanitarian considerations to feature strongly in State decision-making is challenged by systemic weaknesses.
Publisher: Brill | Nijhoff
Date: 25-09-2020
Publisher: Brill | Nijhoff
Date: 2013
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 05-2021
Publisher: Oxford University Press
Date: 03-02-2014
Publisher: Brill
Date: 02-06-2021
DOI: 10.1163/15718085-BJA10061
Abstract: Among the new technologies being deployed at sea, maritime autonomous vehicles ( MAV ) are of increasing interest to States to enhance their intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities to improve their maritime security. This article analyses the international law implications of this use of MAV to support maritime law enforcement efforts in response to drug trafficking and other crimes at sea. The use of MAV for criminal purposes, especially smuggling goods, also holds international law consequences. The article assesses how these different operations of MAV fit within existing legal regimes, highlighting emerging legal questions for resolution and setting out recommendations for law reform to enhance counter-smuggling operations at sea.
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Date: 05-04-2012
Abstract: Litigating International Law Disputes provides a fresh understanding of why states resort to international adjudication or arbitration to resolve international law disputes. A group of leading scholars and practitioners discern the reasons for the use of international litigation and other modes of dispute settlement by examining various substantive areas of international law (such as human rights, trade, environment, maritime boundaries, territorial sovereignty and investment law) as well as considering case studies from particular countries and regions. The chapters also canvass the roles of international lawyers, NGOs, and private actors, as well as the political dynamics of disputes, and identify emergent trends in dispute settlement for different areas of international law.
Publisher: Oxford University Press
Date: 03-2019
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 07-2020
DOI: 10.1017/S0020589320000226
Abstract: The ongoing development of erse maritime autonomous vehicles for varied ocean activities—ranging from scientific research, security surveillance, transportation of goods, military purposes and commission of crimes—is prompting greater consideration of how existing legal frameworks accommodate these vehicles. This article brings together the core legal issues, as well as current developments in relation to commercial shipping, the law of naval warfare, and maritime security. This article captures how these issues are now being addressed and what other legal questions will likely emerge as the newest technology impacts on one of the oldest bodies of international law.
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Date: 18-02-2021
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 03-10-2016
Publisher: Brill
Date: 05-10-2020
Publisher: Brill
Date: 14-06-2017
DOI: 10.1163/15718085-12322045
Abstract: The South China Sea Arbitration raises important questions about the potential operation of the dispute settlement system enshrined in Part xv of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea ( losc ). This article explores the scope and different limitations that we are seeing in the interpretation of the losc dispute settlement regime with a particular focus on the South China Sea Arbitration . This examination questions the contours of the losc Part xv dispute settlement regime and its utility in resolving disputes relating to the South China Sea.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 2011
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 10-2014
DOI: 10.1017/S0020589314000360
Abstract: Maritime interceptions continue as a fundamental dimension to external border controls against irregular migration, as seen most recently in Australia's institution of Operation Sovereign Borders in late 2013. The practice of developed States has highlighted the varied application and interpretation of four bodies of international law: the law of the sea, search and rescue obligations, refugee obligations and international human rights law. This article assesses this practice and the use of laws, highlighting the fragmentation of international law that has resulted. A proposal is presented to harmonize these laws and reconcile the ergent policy perspectives of different stakeholders.
Publisher: Oxford University Press
Date: 06-01-2011
Publisher: Edward Elgar Publishing
Date: 29-08-2014
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 19-07-2019
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 05-06-2014
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 05-06-2014
Publisher: Brill
Date: 2017
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Date: 10-04-2014
Publisher: Brill
Date: 2013
Publisher: Brill | Nijhoff
Date: 2017
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 16-01-2018
DOI: 10.1017/S0020589317000562
Abstract: This article compares the law and practice of the European Union and Australia in respect to the search and rescue (SAR) of boat migrants, concluding that the response to in iduals in peril at sea in both jurisdictions is becoming increasingly securitized. This has led to the humanitarian purpose of SAR being compromised in the name of border security. Part I contrasts the unique challenge posed by SAR operations involving migrants and asylum seekers, as opposed to other people in distress at sea. Part II analyses the relevant international legal regime governing SAR activities and its operation among European States and in offshore Australia. Part III introduces the securitization framework as the explanatory paradigm for shifting State practice and its impact in Europe and Australia. It then examines the consequences of increasing securitization of SAR in both jurisdictions and identifies common trends, including an increase in militarization and criminalization, a lack of transparency and accountability, developments relating to disembarkation and non-refoulement , and challenges relating to cooperation and commodification.
Publisher: Hart Publishing
Date: 2019
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 2017
Publisher: Brill | Nijhoff
Date: 16-12-2018
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 17-09-2019
DOI: 10.1017/S0922156519000451
Abstract: This article sets out two case studies to examine the evolving reality of ‘boat migration’ and the intersecting legal frameworks at play. Our analysis takes a systemic integration approach to reflect on the complex dynamics underpinning responses to the phenomenon in Australia and the Central Mediterranean. The regime that governments purport to act under in any given instance reflects the way they choose to frame incidents and possibly exploit legal gaps in, or contested interpretations of, the relevant rules. The ‘closed ports’ strategy adopted by Italy and Malta against the MV Lifeline and the detention-at-sea policy pursued by Australia are investigated from the competing perspectives of what we call the ‘security lens’ and the ‘humanitarian lens’ to demonstrate how a good faith interpretation of the applicable (if apparently conflicting and overlapping) norms can (and should) be mobilized to save lives, and how that goal is unduly undercut when security concerns trump humanitarian interests.
Publisher: Brill
Date: 2009
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 22-03-2018
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Date: 27-09-2009
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Date: 2018
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 10-2008
Publisher: Brill | Nijhoff
Date: 18-04-2017
Publisher: Edward Elgar Publishing
Date: 11-12-2020
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 2021
Location: Eritrea
Location: United States of America
Start Date: 2016
End Date: 2023
Funder: Macquarie University
View Funded ActivityStart Date: 2019
End Date: 2023
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityStart Date: 2020
End Date: End date not available
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded Activity