Competing over the continental shelf: the legal versus the geophysical entitlements.

The article focuses on the legal complexities surrounding the delimitation of continental shelf entitlements beyond 200 nautical miles (nm) under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), particularly when a State's extended "geophysical" entitlement overlaps with another State's "legal" entitlement within 200 nm. It explains that UNCLOS recognizes two bases for continental shelf entitlement: a "legal" entitlement extending 200 nm from baselines regardless of seabed features, and a "geophysical" entitlement based on natural prolongation of the continental margin beyond 200 nm, which requires scientific proof and is subject to specific conditions. The article argues that while both entitlements are legally valid and may overlap, the "legal" entitlement holds greater normative strength and should primarily guide equitable delimitation, typically through the established three-step delimitation methodology. It also discusses state practice, judicial precedents, and the challenges international courts face in resolving disputes where these entitlements intersect, emphasizing that delimitation must aim for equitable solutions consistent with international law.