Understanding International Space Law and the Liability Mechanism for Commercial Outer Space Activities

Abstract

The status and liability of non-governmental entities for commercial use of outer space activities on behalf of space launching states are not very clear under the existing space law regimes. Non-governmental entities are those who carry private space activities such as commercial launching, supplying different equipment or parts to space agencies and manufacturing spacecraft and satellite. The possible litigation relating to the commercial activities are mainly the financial consequence of damage caused and also the technical complications that private entities face in case of supply of defaulted parts to the space agencies. According to Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty 1967 and Articles II and III of Liability Convention 1972, launching country is liable for any activities in outer space. Even in the case of non-governmental activities, the launching state is liable. Therefore, in the event of any commercial activity from any sovereign states, the state is liable for any accidents and consequential damages.

This article focusses on specific issues such as liability for commercial outer space activities of nongovernmental entities in the existing international space law regimes. It explores the applicable principle of space law and international law in outer space activities. The work also focusses on the impact on space liability regime as well as on the legal efficiency of the links between private entities and state liability. This exercise is important in the background of the increasing number of private spacecrafts scheduled for launching in the future.

Keywords

Liability commercialisation of outer space non-governmental entities international law

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ahn

J. Y.

(2005). Product liability in space transportation: The liability of the manufacturer of space object. Rapenburg, The Netherlands: Leiden University.

Benkö

, & Schrogl

K.-U.

(Eds.). (2005). Space law: Current problems and perspectives for future regulation. The Hague, The Netherlands: Eleven International Publishing.

Carminati

(2015). The optional rules for arbitration of disputes relating to outer space activities: A comparison to the UNCITRAL Rules. Retrieved from http://www.lacba.org/Files/Main%20Folder/Sections/International%20Law/InternationalLawNewsletter/files/Carminati.pdf

Christol

C. Q.

(1980). The moon treaty enters into force. The American Journal of International Law, 79(1), 163–168.

Christol

C. Q.

(1982). The modern international law of outer space (p. 20). Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.

Cohen

A. F.

(1984). Cosmos 954 and the international law of satellite accidents. Yale Journal of International Law, 10(1), 78.

Conley

C. A.

(2011). Outer space treaty. In Gargaud

(Ed.), Encyclopedia of astrobiology (pp. 1192–1192). Heidelberg: Springer Verlag Berlin.

D’Amato

(1990). It’s a bird, It’s a plane, It’s Jus Cogens. Connecticut Journal of International Law, 6(1), 1–6.

Evans

D. L.

(2001). Office of space commercialization, trends in space commerce. Baltimore, MD: Furton Corporation.

10.

Fawcett

J. E. S.

(1984). Outer space: New challenges to law and policy. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.

11.

Fishman

(1985). Space salvage: A proposed treaty amendment to the agreement on the rescue of astronauts, the return of astronauts and the return of objects launched into space. Journal of International Law, 26, 965.

12.

Foster

W. F.

(1972). Convention on international liability for damage caused by space objects. The Canadian. Y.B. of International Law, 10, 137.

13.

Gabrynowicz

J. I.

(2004). Space law: Its Cold War origins and challenges in the era of globalization. Suffolk University Law Review, 37, 1041.

14.

Haanappel

P. P.

(1978). Some observations on the crash of cosmos 954. Journal of Space Law, 6 (1984), 147.

15.

Hall

R. C.

(1969). Rescue and return of astronauts on earth and in outer space. The American Journal of International Law, 63(2), 197–210.

16.

Harris

, & Harris

(2006). The need for air space and outer space demarcation. Space Policy, 22(1), 3–7.

17.

History.com editors (2019). Skylab Crashes to Earth. http://www.history.com/news/the-day-skylab-crashed-to-earth-facts-about-the-first-u-s-space-stations-re-entry

18.

Hurwitz

B. A.

(1992). State liability for outer space activities: In accordance with the 1972 convention on international liability for damage caused by space objects. Dordrecht, Martinus: Nijhoff Publishers.

19.

Jasentuliyana

(1983). Review of the work of the United Nations committee on the peaceful uses of outer space. Journal of Space Law, 11, 125.

20.

Jasentuliyana

(Ed.). (1992). Space law: Development and scope. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.

21.

Jessup

C, & Howard

J. T.

(1959). The United Nations ad hoc committee on the peaceful uses of outer space. American Journal of International Law, 53(4), 877–881.

22.

Lampertius

J. P.

(1991). Need for an effective liability regime for damage caused by debris in outer space. Michigan Journal of International Law, 13(2), 447.

23.

Lee

R. J.

(2015). The convention on international liability for damage caused by space objects and the domestic regulatory responses to its implications. Retrieved from http://www.unoosa.org/pdf/sap/2003/repkorea/presentations/lee.pdf

24.

Marchisio

(2005). Evolutionary stages of the legal subcommittee of the United Nations committee on the peaceful uses of outer space (Copous). The Journal of Space Law, 31, 219.

25.

Nakashidze

(2014). Pacta Sunt Servanda. Batumi International Conference on Law and Politics, 149.

26.

Pocar

J. F.

(2012). An introduction to the PCA’s optional rules for arbitration of disputes relating to outer space activities. Journal of Space Law, 38, 171.

27.

Quinn

A. G.

(2008). New age of space law: The outer space treaty and the weaponization of space. Minnesota Journal of International Law, 17, 475.

28.

Reis

(1978). Some reflections on the liability convention for outer space. Journal of Space Law, 6, 125.

29.

Reynolds

G. H.

, & Merges

R. P.

(1989). Outer space: Problems of law and policy. Colorado: Westview Press.

30.

Risley

L. L.

(1999). Examination of the need to amend space law to protect the private explorer in outer space. An Western State University Law Review, 26, 47.

31.

Roberts

A. E.

(2001). Traditional and modern approaches to customary international law: A reconciliation. American Journal of International Law, 95(4), 757–791.

32.

Rosenfield

S. B.

(1979). Where air space ends and outer space begins. Journal of Space Law, 7, 137.

33.

Tatsuzawa

(1988). Regulation of commercial space activities by the non-governmental entities in space law. Paris: IISL-88-083.

34.

McDougal

M. S.

(1963). Emerging customary law of space. Northwestern University Law Review, 58, 618.

35.

Shaw

M. N.

(2008). International law. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

36.

Trimble

J. J.

(1983). International law of outer space and its effect on commercial space activity. Pepperdine Law Review, 11(3), 521–528.

37.

Vereshchetin

V. S.

, & Danilenko

G. M.

(1985). Custom as a source of international law of outer space. Journal of Space Law, 13, 22.

38.

von derDunk

F. G.

(2003). The registration convention: Background and historical context. Nebraska: University of Nebraska. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1031&context=spacelaws

39.

Wehberg

H. P.

(1959). Pacta Sunt Servanda. The American Journal of International Law, 53(4), 775–786.

40.

Wirin

W. B.

(1994). Practical implications of launching state—Appropriate state definitions. Proceedings/Colloquium on the Law of Outer Space, 37, 112.

Understanding International Space Law and the Liability Mechanism for Commercial Outer Space Activities—Unravelling the Sources

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References