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 concept of the “natural continuation of the land territory of a country” inextricably associated with the emergence and development of the continental shelf institution in the international law. This aforementioned concept, of a natural scientific origin, attained a special legal content, as well as consistently appears in decisions of the international courts, arbitrations, documents of international authorities, and international legal standings of the countries pertinent to the maritime boundaries. It plays a discrete role in determination of rights of the littoral countries to the shelf beyond the limits o 200 nautical miles from the baseline and establishment of its external boundaries with reference to the locality. Namely this explains the relevance of the meaning of term, in this case, in recommendations of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf – the authority that is systematically engaged in implementation of the Article 76 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982. The research demonstrates the discrepancy of the current international practice concerning the role of “natural prolongation” in the acting maritime law. The international legal assessment of documents of the Commissions vary. From the author’s standpoint, the concept is important of determination of rights (“title”) of a littoral state to the corresponding sectors of seabed and resources within, but not for the establishment of exact boundaries of the shelf with reference to the Locality. The question on the role of the indicated concept, its precise meaning and content is subject to further consideration within the framework of the mechanisms of dispute settlement.