Aller au contenu principal
The Juno Trader Case (Saint Vincent and the Grenadines v. Guinea-Bissau)
Saint-Vincent-et-les Grenadines
Amérique latine et Caraïbes
Type of document:
International court
Date of text:
décembre 18, 2004
Données de base:
Court name:
International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
Siège de la Cour:
Marotta Rangel
Bamela Engo
Chandrasekhara Rao
Numéro de référence :
Case No. 13
ECOLEX subject(s):
The “Juno Trader” was a refrigerated cargo vessel flying the flag of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines. It received a transshipment of 1,183 tones of frozen fish to be discharged in Ghana. In September 2004, the “Juno Trader” crossed into the EEZ of Guinea-Bissau at a distance of about 40 nautical mils from the coast, unknown and undeclared to Guinea-Bissau. A navy vessel of Guinea-Bissau arrested the “Juno Trader” and conducted it to the port of Bissau, Guinea-Bissau. The respondent stated that the vessel had violated the provisions of the fishing legislation of Guinea-Bissau. A fine was imposed on the vessel and it’s Master. Saint Vincent and the Grenadines made an application under Article 292 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea requesting the Tribunal to make several orders. The applicant requested, inter alia, a declaration that the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea had jurisdiction, pursuant to Article 292 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982 to hear the Application, and a declaration that the Respondent had violated Article 73, paragraph 2, of the Convention in that the conditions set by the Respondent for the release from detention of the vessel “Juno Trader” and the release of 19 members of its crew were not authorized pursuant to Article 73, paragraph 2, and were not reasonable in terms of Article 73, paragraph 2. Furthermore the applicant requested an order to release the “Juno Trader” from detention and to release its officers and its crew. Guinea-Bissau requested the Tribunal to declare, inter alia, that the application was not well founded. The Tribunal first examined the question of its jurisdiction in accordance with Article 292 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and held that it had jurisdiction to entertain the application. It analyzed Art. 73 Paragraph 2 of the Convention, which reads as follows: “Arrested vessels and their crews shall be promptly released upon the posting of reasonable bond or other security.” The applicant alleged that a bond “in the amount of 50,000 euros, was posted, in the name of the ship-owner, with the competent authorities of Guinea-Bissau” and that “[to] date, neither the release of the detained vessel nor of its crew has been obtained”. The Tribunal examined the relevant factor for determining a reasonable bond and finally found that the allegation made by the Applicant that the Respondent had not complied with the provisions of article 73, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the prompt release of the Juno Trader and its crew upon the posting of a reasonable bond or other financial security was well-founded. Furthermore, it decided that Guinea-Bissau should promptly release the Juno Trader, together with its cargo, upon the posting of a bond or other security to be determined by the Tribunal, and that the crew should be free to leave Guinea-Bissau without any conditions.