09-10-2020, 04:38 PM
11
Re: Charles 2nd gave our fish away !!!
Originally Posted by Percy Vere
->
Here's a direct quote from the story in today's D Express on line: "And in the case of a no deal scenario, the government of Flanders plans to fall back on a treaty issued by England's King Charles II in 1666 that grants 50 fishermen from the Flemish city of Bruges "eternal access" to British waters."*Here's the article in full: https://www.express.co.uk/news/world...666-treaty-spt
And if anyone can read Flemish
, attached is the document that's causing a stir.* Now, I would like to see this tested in court to see if the fishermen from 1666 were those granted "eternal access" and that access ended with their demise or not. For me it all comes down to the legal meaning of the word "eternal".
As a result of this rather lengthy historical exposition, it appears highly
unlikely that the Bruges Privileges, if considered a title under public international
law, would still be valid today. Even if one considers that the periods of non-usage
between 1674 and 1835, as well as for about a century between ca. 1860 and
the 1960s, did not invalidate the title,173 it has been terminated by subsequent
treaty-law. It is likely that already the 1852 voisinage agreement was at least
implicitly intended to replace the Bruges Privileges with a modern fisheries
access agreement. In any event, the considerations presented above with respect
to the effect of the LFC, in particular Article*9(1) LFC, on historic fishing rights
would also generally apply to historic titles such as the Bruges Privileges.
From:
Access to Fisheries in the United Kingdom’s Territorial Sea after its
Withdrawal from the European Union: A European and International
Law Perspective
by Valentin Schatz
It will later be published in GoJIL Vol. 9, No. 3 (2019).
|
|
