header-logo header-logo

12 July 2024 / Athelstane Aamodt
Issue: 8079 / Categories: Features , Technology , International , Regulatory
printer mail-detail

Shoot for the moon: space mining & exploitation

181382
Athelstane Aamodt on the earthly laws of celestial bodies

The fact the Chinese have landed yet another probe on the moon (Chang’e 6), and the fact many nations are now habitually doing this (Japan, India, Russia (usually without any success), and, of course, the US), inevitably prompts the question: who or what decides what happens on the moon?

At the moment the answer to that question is simple: no-one. Although the US was the first country to plant its flag on the moon on 21 July 1969 (which by now would be bleached pure white thanks to the unrelenting, unfiltered sunlight shining down on it), the moon remains the property of no country—at least at the moment.

The Outer Space Treaty, which dates from 1967, forms the basis of international space law and has been ratified by 115 countries. The treaty was largely the product of the advent of Sputnik and Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs). The provisions of the treaty are that no nuclear weapons are to be kept in space, that the moon (and indeed any

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll