The Sellafield MOX Plant Case - an examination
| Author | Elizabeth Wall |
| Position | LL.M (Maritime Law), L.S.E.; Junior Freshman (Law), Trinity College, Dublin |
| Pages | 273-282 |
THE
SELLAFIELD
MOX
PLANT
CASE:
AN
ANALYSIS
OF
THE
ITLOS'
ORDER
ON
IRELAND'S
REQUEST
FOR
PROVISIONAL
MEASURES
Introduction
On
3
December
2001
the
International
Tribunal
for
the
Law
of
the
Sea
("ITLOS"
or
"Tribunal") issued
its
order
on
Ireland's
request
for
provisional
measures
against
the
United
Kingdom
in
a
dispute
arising
from the
commissioning
of
a
nuclear reprocessing
plant
at
Sellafield.
In its
decision
the
Tribunal
denied
Ireland's
request
for
injunctive
measures
primarily
on the
grounds
that Ireland
failed
to
prove
that
the
urgency
of
its
claim warranted
such
measures.
However,
in
the
end
it
may
prove
not
to
have been
a
complete
loss
for
Ireland.
First,
in
the
present matter,
the
Tribunal
ordered
the two
governments
to
take
steps
to
cooperate
and
exchange
information
and
to
report
back
on
progress made
to
ITLOS
almost immediately.
Secondly,
the main
hearing
on
the
complete
case
has
yet
to
be
heard
before
the
full
arbitral tribunal.
Factual
background
of
dispute
In
its
Request
for
Provisional Measures
and
Statement
of
Case
of
Ireland
(hereinafter
"Statement
of
Case")
Ireland outlined
various
factual
elements
which
it
felt
were
relevant
in
the present
case.
These
ranged
from the
concerns over
its
geographic
proximity
to MOX
plant
operations,
1
to
the impacts
of
long-term nuclear activities
at
Sellafield
on
the
Irish
Sea,
2
to
safety
and
regulatory
compliance
issues at
Sellafield,
3
to
its
views
that
the
MOX
authorization
process
was
flawed
and
was
inconsistent
with
the
UK's
obligations
under
the
1982
(hereinafter
"LOSC"
or
"Convention").
4
Case
background
In
late
October
2001,
after
attempts
at
a
bilateral diplomatic solution
had
been
exhausted, Ireland
instituted
proceedings
against
the United
1
Statement
of
Case,
at
4-6, paras. 5-8.
For example, at
its
nearest
point,
Ireland
and the MOX
plant
are
only
112
miles
apart. (para.
5).
Statement
of
Case, at 6-8, paras.
9-13.
3
Statement
of
Case,
at
8-10,
paras.
14-18.
Inter
alia,
Ireland referred
to
a
scandal
involving
falsification
of
safety checks
affecting
the
purity
of
the
fuel,
which
came to light
in
September
1999
and
caused Japan
to
suspend
its
contracts with
Sellafield's
operator.
4
Statement
of
Case,
at
I
1-14,
paras.
19-25.
To continue reading
Request your trial