Abstract: Antarctic is a region with the distinct legal regime. A number of countries claim the territorial sovereignty in Antarctic that also suggests the rights to continental shelf; however, these pretenses have been “frozen” within the framework of the Antarctic Treaty of 1959, which denies any grounds for claiming or maintaining pretenses for territorial sovereignty in Antarctic. The new pretenses or expansion of the existing ones are not declared. According to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (1982), the countries that intended to set the limits of the shelf beyond 200 miles, must submit a request to the Commission on the Limits of Continental Shelf to receive recommendations. The subject of this research is whether or not the regulations of the Treaty of 1959 will impede the submission of requests to the Commission regarding the Antarctic shelf, considering such requests by the Commission, as well as the possible legal consequences. The states claiming sovereignty in Antarctic adhere to several basic strategies that ensure their geopolitical interests, but do not violate the Treaty of 1959. At the same time, from the author’s perspective, the consideration of such request by the Commission will contradicts the international legal regime of Antarctic and the internal documents of the Commission. Therefore, it is currently impossible to set the “external limits of continental shelf of the littoral stat” according to the Article 79 of the Convention of 1982 in Antarctic. The balance of rights and obligations, in accordance of the Antarctic Treaty, should not and cannot be affected by the activity of the Commission in any case.

Abstract: The subject of this research is the debatable question regarding the role of recommendations of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf in delimitation of marine spaces. The specificity of continental shelf lies in the fact that in delineation of its boundaries (beyond the 200-mile distance of the initial lines) is involved the established in accordance with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982 – the Commission. The work of the Commission, concerning the demarcation of shelf from the area, does not cause damage to delimitation of shelf between the neighboring states; however, assigning a special status to the boundaries of the shelf alongside the complexity of regulations of the Convention encourage many authors to determine the possible differences between delimitation within the 200 of sea miles and beyond. The problem becomes more relevant due to the constantly emerging conflict of claims of the neighboring states upon the same parts of the shelf beyond the 200-mile limit. The materials for this research contain the regulations of the Convention, practice of international courts and arbitrations, works of the Russian and foreign scholars. The research demonstrated that the regulations of 1982 Convention ensure the apartness of the process of demarcation and delimitation of the shelf, as well as the lack of temporal relationship between them; the disputing parties on delimitation should not await for the Commission’s recommendations in order to proceed with its settlement. The decision of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea contributed to the clarification of multiple contradictory moments; although some questions on demarcation beyond the 200-mile distance and the role of Commission remain disputable. The judicial and arbitration practice along with the agreement-based activity of the littoral states will encourage filling of the remaining “gaps”.