Maritime Delimitation in the Black Sea case

On February 3, 2009, the court handed down its verdict, establishing a maritime boundary including the continental shelf and exclusive economic zones for Romania and Ukraine.

The Austrian OMV (the owner of Romania's largest oil company, Petrom) signed a contract with Naftogas of Ukraine and Chornomornaftogaz to participate in an auction of concession rights to the area.

[3] On 16 September 2004, Romania brought a case against Ukraine to the International Court of Justice, as part of a dispute over the maritime boundary between the two states in the Black Sea, and claimed that Snake island had no socioeconomic significance.

For example, Aves Island was considered in the United States – Venezuela Maritime Boundary Treaty despite its small size and the fact that it was uninhabited.

Although under Article 121(3), rocks are taken into account in delimiting maritime boundaries, they may be overlooked, discounted or enclaved if they have an inequitable distorting effect in light of their size and location.

Although under Article 121(3), rocks are taken into account in delimiting maritime boundaries, they may be overlooked, discounted or enclaved if they have an inequitable distorting effect in light of their size and location.

[8] While the judgment drew a line that was equitable for both parties, Romania received nearly 80% of the disputed area, allowing it to exploit a significant but undetermined portion of an estimated 100 billion cubic meters of natural gas deposits and 15 million tonnes of oil under the seabed.

Map of the Black Sea and surrounding area, with red and blue boundary lines
Maritime boundaries claimed by Romania (red) and Ukraine (blue)
Map of the Black Sea and surroundings, with a single boundary
Maritime boundary established by the ICJ