The assumption that the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea is the legal framework for all activities taking place in the sea - Ocean Sustainability in the 21st Century - page 360

on a very controversial matter, were consciously designed to decide as little as possible. It
is clear, however, that both articles envisage an equitable result.'
Today the normative gap left in the UNCLOS is being filled by international de-
cisions, which since 1969 2 have been rendered by the ICJ or arbitral tribunals. Such a
notable body of international decisions shows the use of a number of 'methods' (such as
equidistance, proportionality, reduced effect of islands, the shifting of the equidistance line,
the drawing of a corridor) which, in the light of the circumstances relevant to each specific
case, were found by courts to be appropriate for delimiting maritime jurisdictional zones
in order to achieve an equitable solution. The methods in question have today consolidated
into rules of customary international law .
Another gap in the UNCLOS is left by paragraph 6 of Art. 10. It states that the
UNCLOSprovisionsonbaysdonotapplytoso-called historic bays.Thisexception creates
a legal vacuum, since the only conclusion that can reasonably be drawn from the UNCLOS
is that historic bays exist. But nowhere in the UNCLOS is it specified what historic bays
are and what other rules apply to them. Some elements - namely the exercise of state au-
thority,thelong-lastingdurationofthisexercise,acquiescencebyotherstatesand,although
less frequently, the existence of vital interests by the coastal state - are referred to in inter-
national practice and doctrinal works as the constitutive elements of a historical title over
marine waters.