territorial disputes. The case was submitted to a Chamber of the ICJ .
pursuant to a special agreement concluded by the parties in 1983. In .
December 1985, while written submissions were being prepared, .
hostilities broke out in the disputed area. A cease-fire was agreed, .
and the Chamber directed the continued observance of the cease-fire, .
the withdrawal of troops within twenty days, and the avoidance of .
actions tending to aggravate the dispute or prejudice its eventual .
resolution. Both Presidents publicly welcomed the judgement and .
indicated their intention to comply with it. .
In the Fisheries Jurisdiction case (United Kingdom v. Iceland, .
1974) the ICJ contributed to the firm establishment in law of the idea .
that mankind needs to conserve the living resources of the sea and .
must respect these resources. The Court observed: .
It is one of the advances in maritime international law, .
resulting from the intensification of fishing, that the former .
laissez-faire treatment of the living resources of the sea in the high .
seas has been replaced by a recognition of a duty to have due regard .
of the rights of other States and the needs of conservation for the .
benefit of all. Consequently, both parties have the obligation to keep .
inder review the fishery resources in the disputed waters and to .
examine together, in the light of scientific and other available .
information, the measures required for the conservation and .
development, and equitable exploitation, of these resources, taking .
into account any international agreement in force between them, such .
as the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Convention of 24 January 1959, as .
well as such other agreements as may be reached in the matter in the .
course of further negotiation. .
The Court also held that the concept of preferential rights in .
fisheries is not static. This is not to say that the preferential .
rights of a coastal State in a special situation are a static concept, .