Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
com
Before
AT NEW DELHI
V.
Written d
ii
Table of Contents
prayer ........................................................................................................................3
iii
Table of Authorities
INDIAN CASES
P narayan patent law 455 4th ed eastern law house 2006 ................................................................ 2
List of Abbreviation
v
Statement of Jurisdiction
vi
Statement of Facts
vii
Issues Raised
i. I whether there was a contract?
Summary of arguments
That there was a breach of contract
No authorities
Arguments Advanced
“Barbados took the maritime delimitation dispute to PCA based on article 287
clause 3 as none of the countries had made declarations for choice of dispute
settlement mechanisms described under clause 1 of article 287. The PCA had
held that pursuant to article 287 (3), it had jurisdiction over the case. For
delimitation, Barbados claimed” 2-
“International authority clearly prescribes that the Tribunal should start the process of
delimitation by drawing a provisional median line between the coasts of Barbados and
Trinidad and Tobago. This line should be adjusted so as to give effect to a special
circumstance and thus lead to an equitable solution. The special circumstance is the
established traditional artisanal fishing activity of Barbadian fisher folk south of the median
line.”
Trinidad and Tobago on the other hand felt no need to deviate from the provisional median line3,
to establish its continental shelf and EEZ.
line to the special circumstances of the case to achieve an equitable result the second step. The
award also upheld the proportionality test as being the only way to verify the equitability of the
result. This “two-step” method is not mandatory but the most adequate in order to avoid a
subjective determination. Though it leaned more towards what Trinidad claimed, both countries
1
Sharanya kundu, Indian penal code 445(1st ed., Universal law publishing house 2012)
Sharanya kundu, ipc 445 (Amadeus ed, 1st ed, Universal Law publishing 2012)
2
declared themselves to be the winners. Also while examining the 2evidence, the tribunal had
observed that there was risk of giving undue weight to written reports presented as simple record
of hearsay evidence and oral tradition and therefore gave credibility only to those documents
written contemporaneously with the event described and lesser weightage was given to
documents recorded after the dispute started. Therefore hold3ing the same logic, all Chinese
documents that give “evidence” of Chinese control of spratly or Paracel islands if are based on
hearsay, then the weightage of that is tremendously less4.
2
Supra note 1 pg. 500¶5.
id.,pg.500¶5 .
Amadeus, Mens rea, in sharanya kundu, ipc, ….
Sharanya kundu, money laundering,1 Harv. L. Rev.23, 25 (2012).
3
P narayan patent law 455 4th ed eastern law house 2006
4
Party A v Party B ,AIR 12 SC 2014
.
3
prayer
4
Margin- normal
Justified
12
AaBbCc style