Textbook National Space Legislation A Comparative and Evaluative Analysis 1St Edition Annette Froehlich Ebook All Chapter PDF

National Space Legislation A
Comparative and Evaluative Analysis

1st Edition Annette Froehlich
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/national-space-legislation-a-comparative-and-evaluati
ve-analysis-1st-edition-annette-froehlich/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
Space Fostering African Societies Developing the

African Continent through Space Part 1 Annette
Froehlich
https://textbookfull.com/product/space-fostering-african-
societies-developing-the-african-continent-through-space-
part-1-annette-froehlich/
Integrated Space for African Society Legal and Policy

Implementation of Space in African Countries Annette
Froehlich
https://textbookfull.com/product/integrated-space-for-african-
society-legal-and-policy-implementation-of-space-in-african-
countries-annette-froehlich/
Space Fostering Latin American Societies Developing the

Latin American Continent through Space Part 1 Annette
Froehlich
https://textbookfull.com/product/space-fostering-latin-american-
societies-developing-the-latin-american-continent-through-space-
part-1-annette-froehlich/
The United Nations and Space Security: Conflicting

Mandates between UNCOPUOS and the CD Annette Froehlich
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-united-nations-and-space-
security-conflicting-mandates-between-uncopuos-and-the-cd-
annette-froehlich/
Space Supporting Africa Volume 3 Security Peace and
Development through Efficient Governance Supported by
Space Applications Annette Froehlich
https://textbookfull.com/product/space-supporting-africa-
volume-3-security-peace-and-development-through-efficient-
governance-supported-by-space-applications-annette-froehlich/
Embedding Space in African Society The United Nations

Sustainable Development Goals 2030 Supported by Space
Applications Annette Froehlich
https://textbookfull.com/product/embedding-space-in-african-
society-the-united-nations-sustainable-development-
goals-2030-supported-by-space-applications-annette-froehlich/
Reconsidering Constitutional Formation I National

Sovereignty A Comparative Analysis of the
Juridification by Constitution 1st Edition Ulrike Müßig
(Eds.)
https://textbookfull.com/product/reconsidering-constitutional-
formation-i-national-sovereignty-a-comparative-analysis-of-the-
juridification-by-constitution-1st-edition-ulrike-musig-eds/
China s Energy Efficiency and Conservation Household

Behaviour Legislation Regional Analysis and Impacts 1st
Edition Bin Su
https://textbookfull.com/product/china-s-energy-efficiency-and-
conservation-household-behaviour-legislation-regional-analysis-
and-impacts-1st-edition-bin-su/
Evaluative Perception Anna Bergqvist
https://textbookfull.com/product/evaluative-perception-anna-
bergqvist/
Studies in Space Policy
Annette Froehlich
Vincent Seffinga Editors
National
Space
Legislation
A Comparative and Evaluative Analysis
Volume 15
Edited by
The European Space Policy Institute
Director: Jean-Jacques Tortora
Editorial Advisory Board:

Genevieve Fioraso
Gerd Gruppe
Pavel Kabat
Sergio Marchisio
Dominique Tilmans
Ene Ergma
Ingolf Schädler
Gilles Maquet
Jaime Silva
Per Tegnér
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/8167
Annette Froehlich • Vincent Seffinga
Editors
National Space Legislation

A Comparative and Evaluative Analysis
Editors
Annette Froehlich Vincent Seffinga
European Space Policy Institute European Space Policy Institute
Vienna, Austria Vienna, Austria
ISSN 1868-5307 ISSN 1868-5315 (electronic)

ISBN 978-3-319-70430-2 ISBN 978-3-319-70431-9 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70431-9
Library of Congress Control Number: 2018930350
© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of
the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,
broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information
storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the
editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors
or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims
in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Printed on acid-free paper
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer International Publishing AG
part of Springer Nature.
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Contents
1 Introduction�� 1
1.1 The Setting�� 1
1.2 Approach of the Study�� 2
2 Rationale for the Enactment of National Space Legislation�� 5
2.1 International Responsibility, Authorisation and Supervision�� 9
2.2 International Liability �� 10
2.3 Jurisdiction, Control and Registration�� 12
2.4 Interim Conclusion�� 13
3 National Space Legislation�� 15
3.1 Sweden: Act on Space Activities of 1982 �� 16
3.1.1 Rationale�� 16
3.1.2 Scope of the Legislation �� 17
3.1.3 Subject Matter of the Legislation �� 18
3.2 The UK: Outer Space Act of 1986�� 21
3.3 Australia: Space Activities Act of 1998�� 31
3.4 China: Interim Measures on Licencing of Civil Space
Objects of 2002 �� 47
v
vi Contents
3.5 Belgium: Act on the Activities of Launching, Flight

Operation or Guidance of Space Objects of 2005�� 55
3.6 The Netherlands: Space Activities Act of 2007�� 65
3.7 France: Act on Space Operations of 2008�� 76
3.8 Austria: Outer Space Act of 2011 �� 86
3.9 Indonesia: Space Act of 2013 �� 95
3.10 Denmark: Danish Outer Space Act of 2016�� 103
3.11 New Zealand: Outer Space and High-Altitude Activities
Act of 2017 �� 111
4 Alternative Law: Luxembourg’s National Space Law �� 125
4.1 Rationale �� 125
4.1.1 Genesis of the Luxembourg Law
on the Exploitation and Utilisation of Space
Resources�� 127
4.1.2 Concerns of the Conseil d’État About
Legal Certainty �� 128
4.2 Luxembourg’s Provisions on Space Resource Mining �� 130
4.2.1 Appropriation of Space Resources �� 131
4.2.2 Authorisation for Commercial Operators
and Responsibility�� 132
4.2.3 Risk Covering and Sanctions�� 134
Contents vii
5 Comparative Analysis of National Space Legislation �� 137

5.1 Scope of the Legislation�� 137
5.1.1 Territorial and Personal Scope �� 138
5.1.2 Material Scope�� 142
5.1.3 Delimitation�� 145
5.2 Subject Matter of the Legislation�� 146
5.2.1 Authorisation�� 146
5.2.2 Insurance�� 158
5.2.3 Recourse and Liability�� 161
5.2.4 Registration�� 169
5.2.5 Environmental Protection�� 173
5.2.6 Enforcement �� 177
5.2.7 Other Regulated Subjects �� 182
6 Final Considerations�� 187
About the Authors
Annette Froehlich is a scientific expert seconded from the German Aerospace

Center (DLR) to the European Space Policy Institute (Vienna) and Honorary
Adjunct Senior Lecturer at the University of Cape Town (SA) at SpaceLab. She
graduated in European and International Law at the University of Strasbourg
(France), followed by business-oriented postgraduate studies and her PhD at the
University of Vienna (Austria). Responsible for DLR and German representation to
the United Nations and International Organizations, Dr. Froehlich was also a mem-
ber/alternate head of delegation of the German delegation of UNCOPUOS. Moreover,
Dr. Annette Froehlich is author of a multitude of specialist publications and serves
as lecturer at various universities worldwide in space policy, law and society aspects.
Her main areas of scientific interest are European Space Policy, International and
Regional Space Law, Emerging Space Countries, Space Security and Space and
Culture. Annette.Froehlich@espi.or.at; Annette.Froehlich@dlr.de.
Alexander Gairiseb is on secondment from the Ministry of Works and Transport

to the Namibia Civil Aviation Authority as an Aviation Security Inspector:
Regulations. His primary responsibilities include the development of aviation secu-
rity regulations and policies, as well as reviewing stakeholders’ security pro-
grammes. He holds the degree of Bachelor of Laws (Honours) from the University
of Namibia. He is currently pursuing a Master of Philosophy in Space Studies
degree at the University of Cape Town’s SpaceLab, South Africa. He has published
several articles relating to space law; agairiseb@gmail.com.
Ega Muhammad Megah is an LL.M. graduate from the International Institute of

Air and Space Law (IIASL) at Leiden University. He has a solid understanding of
law and policy in the aviation and space industry through his previous work experi-
ence at Garuda Indonesia (the national Indonesian airline) as a Network Management
Analyst and at the National Institute of Aeronautics and Space (LAPAN – Indonesian
ix
x About the Authors
Space Agency) as a Legal Research Assistant. His study at the IIASL has expanded
his legal and policy knowledge not only with respect to the Asia-Pacific region but
also the European region and international space affairs in general; muhammad.
megah2210@gmail.com.
Vincent Seffinga has a strong interest in legal issues and research in high-tech
industries, in particular with respect to outer space. He has recently graduated in a
Master’s degree of Law in Public International Law and a Master’s degree of Law
in International and European Tax Law at the University of Amsterdam. He has
developed his knowledge of space law and policy through his internship at the
European Space Policy Institute (Vienna), his participation in the ECSL Summer
Course as a student in 2016 (Warsaw) and as a tutor in 2017 (Rome), and his partici-
pation in the 2017 Manfred Lachs Moot Court Competition with the Leuphana
Universität Lüneburg team; vincentseffinga@gmail.com.
Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1 The Setting
It is well documented that the exploration and use of outer space were at first pri-
marily conducted by states through their respective governmental space agencies or
international cooperative efforts.1 However, the utilisation of outer space quickly
privatised and commercialised, with private entities becoming an integral part of the
space sector.2 Considering that it is widely accepted that states are responsible for
space activities conducted by their national private entities, states have a clear incen-
tive to regulate such activities.3 This incentive is further reinforced because private
entities can conduct their space activities from the territory or under the jurisdiction
of any state, even those that do not possess the necessary infrastructure to launch
objects into outer space or that are not State Parties to the international instruments
1
Irmgard Marboe, ‘National Space Legislation’ in Christian Brünner & Alexander Soucek (eds),
Outer Space in Society, Politics and Law (SpringerWienNewYork 2011), 439 | Frans von der
Dunk, ‘International Space Law’ in Frans von der Dunk & Fabio Tronchetti (eds), Handbook of
Space Law (Edward Elgar Publishing 2015), 45 | Christophe Venet, ‘The Economic Dimension’ in
Christian Brünner & Alexander Soucek (eds), Outer Space in Society, Politics and Law
(SpringerWienNewYork 2011), 55
2
Irmgard Marboe & Setsuko Aoki, ‘Historical Background and Context’ in Stephan Hobe,
Bernhard Schmidt-Tedd, Kai-Uwe Schrogl (eds) & Peter Stubbe (assistant ed), Cologne
Commentary on Space Law, vol 3 (Carl Heymanns Verlag 2015), 494 | Christophe Venet, ‘The
Economic Dimension’ in Christian Brünner & Alexander Soucek (eds), Outer Space in Society,
Politics and Law (SpringerWienNewYork 2011), 55–56 | Julian Hermida, Legal Basis for a
National Space Legislation (Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004), xiii | Paul Dempsey, ‘National
Laws Governing Commercial Space Activities: Legislation, Regulation, & Enforcement’ (2016)
36 Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business 1, 3
3
Mireille Couston, ‘France’ in Karl-Heinz Böckstiegel, Marietta Benkö & Stephan Hobe (eds),
Space Law: Basic Legal Documents, vol 5 (Eleven International Publishing 2011), 1–3 | Paul
Dempsey, ‘National Laws Governing Commercial Space Activities: Legislation, Regulation, &
Enforcement’ (2016) 36 Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business 1, 4
© Springer International Publishing AG 2018 1

A. Froehlich, V. Seffinga (eds.), National Space Legislation,
Studies in Space Policy 15, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70431-9_1
2 1 Introduction
regulating outer space.4 Accordingly, an increasing number of states have enacted or

are in the process of enacting national space legislation to provide the necessary
regulatory framework for space activities conducted by private entities. For exam-
ple, Austria, Denmark and New Zealand have recently adopted national space leg-
islation.5 Moreover, the United Arab Emirates and Finland are in the process of
drafting and enacting national space legislation.6 In addition, there is strong interest
in the revision of existing national space legislation in the UK, the USA and
Australia.7 The interest in national space legislation, and the importance thereof to
regulating space activities conducted by private entities, thus gives a clear incentive
to conduct a comparative analysis of the national space legislation of various states.
The purpose of this report is to provide such a comparative analysis that will detail
the similarities and differences between the national space laws of selected states
with a focus on European comprehensive national space legislation. This report is
intended to assist the efforts of states that are seeking to enact or revise national
space legislation not only by presenting the approaches taken by other states but
also by presenting, as far as possible, the rationale behind their approaches.
1.2 Approach of the Study
The research consists of three parts. To frame the rest of the study, the first part will
discuss the rationale that motivates states to enact national space legislation. In this
respect, the connection between international space law and national space law will
be discussed. The focus will be on those international obligations that, in effect,
oblige states to enact national space legislation. In particular, Articles VI, VII and
4
Elisabeth Back Impallomeni, ‘Necessities for the Development of National Space Law’ in
Christian Brünner & Edith Walter (eds), Nationales Weltraumrecht/National Space Law (Böhlau
2008), 30
5
NPOC Space Law Austria, ‘Austrian Outer Space Act entered into force’ <https://www.spacelaw.
at/austrian-outer-space-act/> accessed 7 June 2017 | Michael Listner, ‘A Comprehensive First
Look at Denmark’s Domestic Space Law’ (The Space Review, 31 May 2016) <http://www.thespa-
cereview.com/article/2994/1> accessed 8 June 2017 | New Zealand Government, ‘Outer Space and
High-Altitude Activities Bill into Law’ (Scoop, 4 July 2017) <http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/
PA1707/S00052/outer-space-and-high-altitude-activities-bill-into-law.htm> accessed 5 July 2017
6
Lucy Barnard, ‘UAE to Finalise Space Laws Soon’ (The National, 7 March 2016) <http://www.
thenational.ae/business/aviation/uae-to-finalise-space-laws-soon> accessed 7 June 2017 | Ministry
of Economic Affairs and Employment, ‘National Space Legislation Prepared’ <http://tem.fi/en/
spacelaw> accessed 24 September 2017
7
Paul Rincon, ‘Queen’s Speech: Plan Aims to Secure Space Sector’ (BBC, 21 June 2017) <http://
www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-40354695> accessed 23 June 2017 | Jeff Foust, ‘Cruz
Plans New NASA Authorization and Commercial Launch Bills’ (SpaceNews, 22 March 2017)
<http://spacenews.com/cruz-plans-new-nasa-authorization-and-commercial-launch-bills/>
accessed 7 June 2017 | Australian Government Department of Industry, Innovation and Science,
‘Reform of the Space Activities Act 1998’ <https://industry.gov.au/industry/IndustrySectors/
space/Pages/Review-of-the-Space-Activities-Act-1998.aspx> accessed 7 June 2017
1.2 Approach of the Study 3
VIII of the Outer Space Treaty,8 dealing with responsibility, liability and registra-
tion, as well as the Liability Convention9 and the Registration Convention10 will be
discussed. Although it is necessary to examine these international obligations to
provide a framework for the rest of the study, it would go beyond the scope of the
study to undertake an in-depth evaluative analysis. Rather, the chapter will discuss
the evident substance of these international obligations using authoritative second-
ary sources, mostly in the form of scholarly publications. Furthermore, the discus-
sion of the selected national space laws will in itself touch upon the interpretations
of the international obligations under Articles VI, VII and VIII of the Outer Space
Treaty because the choices made by states in their national space legislation often
depend on their interpretation of the aforementioned international obligations.
The second part will discuss, on a country-by-country basis, the national space
legislation of selected states. As such the report will discuss, in chronological order
from oldest to most recently enacted, the national space legislation of Sweden, the
UK, Australia, China, Belgium, the Netherlands, France, Austria, Indonesia,
Denmark and New Zealand. Although the traditional spacefaring nations, the USA
and Russia, have national space legislation,11 they will not be included in this study.
This choice has been made primarily because the study intends to focus on the com-
prehensive national space legislation of European states and will use the national
space legislation of states in the Asia-Pacific region as a secondary perspective.
With respect to the USA, its national space legislation is not comprehensive but
rather sector-based, meaning issues are regulated by different acts or regulations.
Likewise, Russian space legislation is formed by a narrow general law that refers to
many laws, decrees and regulations for further regulation.12 The national space
legislation of the USA and Russia thus does not fit the limitations of the study.
Second, the choice was also made to ensure that the scope of the study is not too
8
Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space,
including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (adopted 19 December 1966, entered into force 10
October 1967) 610 UNTS 205 [hereinafter: Outer Space Treaty]
9
Convention on the International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects (adopted 29
March 1972, entered into force 1 September 1972) 961 UNTS 187 [hereinafter: Liability
Convention]
10
Convention on Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space (adopted 12 November 1974,
entered into force 15 September 1976) 1023 UNTS 15 [hereinafter: Registration Convention]
11
With respect to the US and Russian laws see: Irmgard Marboe, ‘National Space Law’ in Frans
von der Dunk & Fabio Tronchetti (eds), Handbook of Space Law (Edward Elgar Publishing 2015),
139–148 | Joanne Gabrynowicz, ‘One Half Century and Counting: The Evolution of U.S. National
Space Law and Three Long-Term Emerging Issues’ (2010) 4 Harvard Law and Policy Review 405
| Paul Dempsey, ‘Overview of the United States Space Policy and Law’ in Ram Jakhu (ed),
National Regulation of Space Activities (Springer 2010), 373–404 | Petra Vorwig, ‘Regulation of
Private Launch Services in the United States’ in Ram Jakhu (ed), National Regulation of Space
Activities (Springer 2010), 405–419 | Sergey Malkov & Catherine Doldirina, ‘Regulation of Space
Activities in the Russian Federation’ in Ram Jakhu (ed), National Regulation of Space Activities
(Springer 2010), 315–333
12
Irmgard Marboe, ‘National Space Law’ in Frans von der Dunk & Fabio Tronchetti (eds),
Handbook of Space Law (Edward Elgar Publishing 2015), 145
4 1 Introduction
extensive and vast. Although Norway was the first European state to enact national
space legislation through its Act on Launching Objects from Norwegian Territory,
etc. into Outer Space,13 it is very short and merely regulates the scope of the legisla-
tion and the authorisation of space activities. Therefore, the inclusion of Norway
would not fit the scope of the study, as it is not sufficiently comprehensive.
The analysis of each state will follow the same scheme. First, the analysis will
discuss the specific rationale motivating the state to enact national space legislation.
Thereafter, the scope of the legislation is discussed. Finally, the analysis will focus
on the subject matter of the legislation including, inter alia, authorisation, insurance,
recourse and liability, registration, environmental protection and enforcement. In
addition, the national space legislation of Luxembourg will be discussed to provide
an alternative approach towards national space legislation that addresses one par-
ticular activity rather than striving to provide a comprehensive regulatory frame-
work. The inclusion of the Luxembourg law follows from, and is necessitated by,
increased interest in space resource mining in recent years. The analysis in this part
will primarily be conducted through the examination of primary sources, i.e. the
acts, decrees and orders enacted by the states. Furthermore, the relevant explanatory
memoranda to these primary sources will be used to clarify the provisions and
explain the rationale behind the provisions. Scholarly publications will be consid-
ered as a subsidiary means of interpretation of the legislation if the primary sources
do not provide sufficient clarity.
Thereafter, based on the analyses, the study will conduct a comparative analysis
between the selected national space laws. This comparative analysis will ascertain
the common and diverging approaches taken towards regulating space activities
conducted by private entities, which will occur on a subject-by-subject basis. That
is, the subjects that have been identified in the analysis of the various national space
legislations will each be discussed and compared separately. For the most part, this
comparative analysis will draw on the separate analyses but will, if necessary, also
make use of secondary sources, such as articles, publications or commentaries. The
comparative analysis will discuss the choices made by states in their approaches to
national space legislation. It is not the purpose of this study to give specific recom-
mendations on the approaches that should be taken by states with respect to national
space legislation. However, the more ambiguous or problematic approaches taken in
national space legislation, which might create uncertainty about, or leave gaps in,
the adherence to international obligations, will be identified.
13
Act on Launching Objects from Norwegian Territory etc. into Outer Space, no. 38 from 13 June
1969 <http://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/nationalspacelaw/norway/act_38_1969E.
html> accessed 1 November 2017
Chapter 2
Rationale for the Enactment of National
Space Legislation
The body of international space law consists first and foremost of the five UN Space
Treaties,1 which are, in addition to the aforementioned Outer Space Treaty,
Registration Convention and Liability Convention, the Rescue Agreement2 and the
Moon Agreement.3 Moreover, there are a number of nonlegally binding UN resolu-
tions and soft law efforts that elaborate or interpret the principles and obligations in
the five UN Space Treaties.4 The most relevant UN resolutions in relation to national
space legislation are the 2004 Resolution on the Application of the Concept of the
‘Launching State’,5 the 2007 Resolution on the Recommendations on Enhancing
the Practice of States and International Intergovernmental Organizations in
Registering Space Objects,6 the 2007 Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines of the
Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space7 and the 2013 Resolution on
1
Frans von der Dunk, ‘International Space Law’ in Frans von der Dunk & Fabio Tronchetti (eds),
Handbook of Space Law (Edward Elgar Publishing 2015), 43 | Alexander Soucek, ‘International
Law’ in Christian Brünner & Alexander Soucek (eds), Outer Space in Society, Politics and Law
(SpringerWienNewYork 2011), 332
2
Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects
Launched Into Outer Space (adopted 22 April 1968, entered into force 3 December 1968) 672
UNTS 119 [hereinafter: Rescue Agreement]
3
Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (adopted
5 December 1979, entered into force 11 July 1984) 1363 UNTS 21 [hereinafter: Moon Agreement]
4
Frans von der Dunk, ‘International Space Law’ in Frans von der Dunk & Fabio Tronchetti (eds),
Handbook of Space Law (Edward Elgar Publishing 2015), 41–42 | Stephan Hobe, ‘Historical
Background’ in Stephan Hobe, Bernhard Schmidt-Tedd, Kai-Uwe Schrogl (eds) & Gérardine Goh
(assistant ed), Cologne Commentary on Space Law, vol 1 (Carl Heymanns Verlag 2009), 16–17
5
UNGA Application of the Concept of the “Launching State” (2004) UN Doc A/RES/59/115
[hereinafter: Resolution on the Concept of the “Launching State”]
6
UNGA Recommendations on Enhancing the Practice of States and International Intergovernmental
Organizations in Registering Space Objects (2007) UN Doc A/RES/62/101 [hereinafter: Resolution
on Enhancing Registration]
7
UNCOPUOS Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines of the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of
Outer Space (2007) UN Doc A/62/20, endorsed by UNGA International Cooperation in the

6 2 Rationale for the Enactment of National Space Legislation
Recommendations on National Legislation Relevant to the Peaceful Exploration

and Use of Outer Space,8 insomuch as that these resolutions interpret principles and
provisions under international space law that are relevant to national space legisla-
tion. The Resolution on National Legislation is of particular importance because it
recommends a number of provisions that should be included in national space leg-
islation so ‘that the obligations under international law and those specifically con-
tained in the United Nations treaties on outer space are implemented’.9 A further
instrument that is relevant to national space legislation is the Sofia Guidelines for a
Model Law on National Space Legislation of the International Law Association.10
Both the Resolution on National Legislation and the Sofia Guidelines recommend
matters for regulation by national space legislation. The recommendations, derived
from the obligations under international space law as set out in the UN Space
Treaties and UN resolutions, entail the regulation of:
• The scope of the legislation, which details which space activities fall within the
legislation, to whom the legislation is applicable and where the legislation is
applicable geographically
• Authorisation of space activities, including the conditions for granting, altering
or revoking such authorisation, as well as the transfer of ownership of space
objects
• Continuous supervision of space activities conducted by private entities
• Protection of the environment, including the mitigation of space debris
• Registration of space objects in a national registry and furnishing relevant infor-
mation to the Secretary General of the United Nations for the international
registry
• Mechanisms for the state to seek recourse against private entities whose space
objects have caused damage for which the international liability of the state has
been engaged
• Appropriate coverage for damage caused by space objects of private entities
through insurance requirements
• Enforcement mechanisms to assure adherence to the requirements and condi-
tions set out in the legislation
States generally want to enact national legislation so as to regulate activities in
the manner they see most fit, to stimulate or discourage certain behaviour or to
Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (2007) UN Doc A/RES/62/217 [hereinafter: Space Debris Mitigation
Guidelines]
8
UNGA Recommendations on National Legislation Relevant to the Peaceful Exploration and Use
of Outer Space (2013) UN Doc A/RES/68/74 [hereinafter: Resolution on National Legislation]
9
Resolution on National Legislation, preamble | Tare Brisibe, ‘Preambular Paragraphs’ in Stephan
Hobe, Bernhard Schmidt-Tedd, Kai-Uwe Schrogl (eds) & Peter Stubbe (assistant ed), Cologne
Commentary on Space Law, vol 3 (Carl Heymanns Verlag 2015), 549–550
10
ILA Space Law (2012) Resolution no. 6/2012, Annex Sofia Guidelines for a Model Law on
National Space Legislation [hereinafter: Sofia Guidelines] | Irmgard Marboe, ‘National Space
Law’ in Frans von der Dunk & Fabio Tronchetti, Handbook of Space Law (Edward Elgar Publishing
2015), 181–184
2 Rationale for the Enactment of National Space Legislation 7
s afeguard their interests and the rights of their citizens. For example, one motivation
is to provide a competitive legislative framework that will increase the chances that
private entities will conduct their activities from the territory of the state that enacted
the legislation.11 Providing competitive legislation might develop or strengthen the
commercial space economy in that state. This will result in an increase in jobs and
innovation, which is not just limited to the space sector.
Although these reasons are also applicable to the motivation to enact national
space legislation,12 the primary motivation is to adhere to the international obliga-
tions that rest upon states.13 However, some of these obligations, such as the obliga-
tion to refrain from appropriating (a part of) outer space under Article II of the Outer
Space Treaty or the obligation to avoid the harmful contamination of outer space
under Article IX of the Outer Space Treaty, are substantive obligations. Although
states need to ensure that activities conducted by private entities for which they are
responsible adhere to these obligations, the substantive obligations are not the imme-
diate reason for states to enact national space legislation. Rather, the primary obliga-
tions that prompt this decision are Articles VI, VII and VIII of the Outer Space Treaty
and their elaboration in the Liability Convention and the Registration Convention.
Unlike the substantive obligations, Articles VI, VII and VIII of the Outer Space
Treaty establish a direct link between the state and space activities conducted by
private entities, which is established through specific obligations that rest upon the
state with respect to these activities.
11
Dimitri Lindern, ‘The Impact of National Space Legislation on Private Space Undertakings:
Regulatory Competition vs. Harmonization’ (2016) 8 Journal of Science Policy & Governance
<http://www.sciencepolicyjournal.org/uploads/5/4/3/4/5434385/linden_nationalspacelegislation.
pdf> accessed on 2 October 2017, 6
12
Outer Space in Society, Politics and Law (SpringerWienNewYork 2011), 440
13
Wetsontwerp met betrekking tot de activiteiten op het gebied van het lanceren, het bedienen van
de vlucht of het geleiden van ruimtevoorwerpen, Belgische Kamer van Volksvertegenwoordigers,
14 februari 2005, Doc 51 1607/001, 5 (Draft on the Activities of Launching, Flight Operations, or
Guidance of Space Objects, Belgian Chamber of Representatives, 14 February 2005, Doc 51
1607/001, BE, 5) | Memorie van Toelichting bij de Wet betreffende regels omtrent ruimtevaartac-
tiviteiten en de instelling van een register van ruimtevoorwerpen (Wet ruimtevaartactiviteiten) van
24 januari 2007, Kamerstukken II 2005/06, 30 609, nr. 3, 6–7 (Explanatory Memorandum to the
Act on the rules concerning space activities and the establishment of a registry of space objects
(Space Activities Act) of 24 January 2007, NL, 6–7) | Erläuterungen bei Bundesgesetz über die
Genehmigung von Weltraumaktivitäten und die Enrichtung eines Weltraumregisters
(Weltraumgesetz) vom 6. Dezember 2011, 1466 der Beilagen XXIV, Allgemeiner Teil (Explanatory
Memorandum to the Austrian Federal Law on the Authorisation of Space Activities and the
Establishment of a National Space Registry of 6 December 2011, Appendix to the Austrian Outer
Space Act, AT, General Part) | Forslag om Lov om aktiviteter I det ydre rum, Lovforslag nr. L 128,
Folketinget 2015–2016, Fremsat den 24. Februar 2016 af uddannelses- og forskningsministeren, 5
(Proposal for the Law on Activities in outer space, Bill nr. L 128, Danish Parliament 2015–2016,
Proposed on 24 February 2016 by the Minister for Education and Research, DK, 5)
Although the Outer Space Treaty has been widely ratified, with 105 ratifications
and another further 25 signatories,14 a number of states have not yet ratified it.
Nonetheless, these states still have strong incentives to enact national space legisla-
tion. First, private entities can conduct their activities from the territory of states that
do not possess launching capabilities themselves,15 for example, by the transfer of
the control over a satellite after it has achieved its orbit or through the procurement
of a launch for their space object from a different state’s territory. Therefore, even
though states might consider it superfluous to ratify the UN Space Treaties because
in the past it was unlikely that space activities would be conducted under their juris-
diction, space activities can, and are increasingly more likely to, be conducted under
their jurisdiction.
Second, the principles contained in the Outer Space Treaty have been held to be
norms of customary international law, some already before its adoption.16 In fact,
the aforementioned obligations are also found in Principles 5, 7 and 8 of the
Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration
and Use of Outer Space.17 Although the Declaration of Legal Principles, as a UN
General Assembly resolution, is in principle not legally binding, the principles con-
tained therein are still considered to be legally binding as norms of customary inter-
national law.18 As such, even if the Outer Space Treaty is not applicable to a state,
either because that state has not ratified the treaty or because it has withdrawn from
the treaty, that state is still bound to the customary international law crystallised in
the Outer Space Treaty and the Declaration of Legal Principles. Therefore, states
that have not ratified the Outer Space Treaty are still responsible for space activities
conducted by private entities, need to authorise and continually supervise these
activities, are internationally liable for the damage caused by these space activities
if the state is the launching state and register space objects. As such, the need to
enact national space legislation because of international obligations remains, even if
a state has not ratified the Outer Space Treaty.
14
UNCOPUOS Legal Subcommittee, Status of International Agreements Relating to Activities in
Outer Space as at 1 January 2017 (2017) UN Doc A/AC.105/C.2/2017/CRP.7, 12
15
Elisabeth Back Impallomeni, ‘Necessities for the Development of National Space Law’ in
Christian Brünner & Edith Walter (eds), Nationales Weltraumrecht/National Space Law (Böhlau
2008), 30
16
He Qizhi, ‘The Outer Space Treaty in Perspective’ (1997) 25 Journal of Space Law 93, 97 |
Francis Lyall & Paul Larsen, Space Law: A Treatise (Ashgate 2009), 80 | Vladimir Kopal, ‘The
Role of United Nations Declarations of Principle in the Progressive Development of Space Law’
in Francis Lyall & Paul Larsen (eds), Space Law (Ashgate 2007), 97 | Fabio Tronchetti, ‘Soft Law’
in Christian Brünner & Alexander Soucek (eds), Outer Space in Society, Politics and Law
(SpringerWienNewYork 2011), 619 | Andrei Terekhov, ‘UN General Assembly Resolution and
Outer Space Law’ in Francis Lyall & Paul Larsen (eds), Space Law (Ashgate 2007), 109 | Armel
Kerrest & Lesley Jane-Smith, ‘Article VII’ in Stephan Hobe, Bernhard Schmidt-Tedd, Kai-Uwe
Schrogl (eds) & Gérardine Goh (assistant ed), Cologne Commentary on Space Law, vol 1 (Carl
Heymanns Verlag 2009), 135
17
UNGA Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and
Use of Outer Space (1963) UN Doc A/RES/18/1962 [hereinafter: Declaration of Legal Principles]
18
Imre Csabafi, The Concept of State Jurisdiction in International Space Law (Springer 1971),
103–104
2.1 International Responsibility, Authorisation and Supervision 9
2.1 International Responsibility, Authorisation

and Supervision
The provision that first and foremost prompts the enactment of national space legis-
lation is Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty, which states:
States Parties to the Treaty shall bear international responsibility for national activities in
outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, whether such activities are car-
ried on by governmental agencies or by non-governmental entities, and for assuring that
national activities are carried out in conformity with the provisions set forth in the present
Treaty. The activities of non-governmental entities in outer space, including the Moon and
other celestial bodies, shall require authorization and continuing supervision by the appro-
priate State Party to the Treaty. When activities are carried on in outer space, including the
Moon and other celestial bodies, by an international organization, responsibility for compli-
ance with this Treaty shall be borne both by the international organization and by the States
Parties to the Treaty participating in such organization.
Therefore, because states are responsible for activities carried out by private enti-
ties, they need to ensure that those activities adhere to the provisions of the Outer
Space Treaty and need to authorise and continually supervise the activities con-
ducted by private entities for which that state is responsible.19 Article VI of the Outer
Space Treaty not only establishes a direct link between the state and private entities
but also creates a strong incentive to enact national space legislation. This incentive
lies in the fact that activities by private entities that violate international law give
rise to the international responsibility of the state,20 and thus states will want to
regulate the space activities conducted by private entities for which they are respon-
sible. Even further, the international responsibility of states for private entities
makes nearly mandatory the enactment of national space legislation. Although a
state could guarantee its responsibility and its obligation to authorise and continu-
ally supervise and secure its interests through other methods, national space legisla-
tion is the obvious mechanism to adhere to these obligations.
However, the question remains as to which state is responsible for which activity.
In principle it is agreed that it is the state that has, and can, exercise jurisdiction over
19
Michael Gerhard, ‘Article VI’ in Stephan Hobe, Bernhard Schmidt-Tedd, Kai-Uwe Schrogl (eds)
& Gérardine Goh (assistant ed), Cologne Commentary on Space Law, vol 1 (Carl Heymanns
Verlag 2009), 107 & 117 | Tanja Masson-Zwaan, ‘Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty and Private
Human Access to Space’ in Corinne M. Contant Jorgensen (ed), Proceedings of the International
Institute of Space Law 2008 (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics 2009), 537 |
Ricky Lee, Law and Regulation of Commercial Mining of Mineral in Outer Space (Springer 2012),
153 | Hanneke L van Traa-Engelman, Commercial Utilization of Outer Space (Martinus Nijhoff
Publishers 1993), 22
20
Frans von der Dunk, Private Enterprise and Public Interest in the European ‘Spacescape’
(International Institute of Air and Space Law 1998), 18 | Bin Cheng, ‘Article VI of the 1967 Space
Treaty Revisited: “International Responsibility”, “National Activities”, and “The Appropriate
State”’ (1998) 26 Journal of Space Law 7, 15
the activity that is internationally responsible.21 Both the travaux préparatoires of

the Outer Space Treaty and state practice indicate that the state, which has jurisdic-
tion, is determined on the basis of territorial and/or personal jurisdiction.22
Nevertheless, to what extent states extend their jurisdiction over space activities
differs per state, as will be seen in the comparative analysis.
Apart from establishing the international responsibility of states, Article VI of
the Outer Space Treaty explicitly stipulates that space activities conducted by pri-
vate entities need to be authorised and continuously supervised by the appropriate
state.23 Excluding the requirement that the activities need to be in conformity with
the provisions of the Outer Space Treaty, Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty does
not set any substantive requirements to the authorisation. Likewise, no substantive
requirements have been set for the continuous supervision of activities. The lack of
substantive requirements, while still being under the obligation to authorise and
continuously supervise the activities, generally is the reason for enacting national
space legislation.24
2.2 International Liability
Although Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty, and in particular the obligation to
authorise activities carried out by non-governmental entities, is the primary reason
for enacting national space legislation, Article VII of the Outer Space Treaty also
provides strong incentives.25 Article VII of the Outer Space Treaty states:
21
Verlag 2009), 112 | Bin Cheng, ‘Article VI of the 1967 Space Treaty Revisited: “International
Responsibility”, “National Activities”, and “The Appropriate State”’ (1998) 26 Journal of Space
Law 7, 23 | Frans von der Dunk, ‘International Space Law’ in Frans von der Dunk & Fabio
Tronchetti (eds), Handbook of Space Law (Edward Elgar Publishing 2015), 54 | Julian Hermida,
Legal Basis for a National Space Legislation (Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004), 9
22
Verlag 2009), 113–114
23
Ricky Lee, ‘Liability Arising from Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty: States, Domestic Law
and Private Operators’ (2005) Proceedings of the 48th Colloquium on the Law of Outer Space 216,
218
24
Verlag 2009), 119 | Paul Dempsey, ‘National Laws Governing Commercial Space Activities:
Legislation, Regulation, & Enforcement’ (2016) 36 Northwestern Journal of International Law &
Business 1, 14 | Michael Gerhard, ‘The State of the Art and Recent Development of National Space
Law’ in Christian Brünner & Edith Walter, Nationales Weltraumrecht/National Space Law (Böhlau
2008), 61
25
Armel Kerrest & Lesley Jane-Smith, ‘Article VII’ in Stephan Hobe, Bernhard Schmidt-Tedd,
Kai-Uwe Schrogl (eds) & Gérardine Goh (assistant ed), Cologne Commentary on Space Law, vol
1 (Carl Heymanns Verlag 2009), 144 | Irmgard Marboe, ‘National Space Law’ in Frans von der
Dunk & Fabio Tronchetti, Handbook of Space Law (Edward Elgar Publishing 2015), 137
2.2 International Liability 11
Each State Party to the Treaty that launches or procures the launching of an object into outer
space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, and each State Party from whose ter-
ritory or facility an object is launched, is internationally liable for damage to another State
Party to the Treaty or its natural or juridical persons by such object or its component parts
on the Earth, in air space or in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies.
Accordingly, a state that is the ‘launching state’ of a space object, that is, the state
that launches or procures the launch of an object into outer space or from whose
territory or facility an object is launched, is internationally liable for the damage
caused by that space object. This liability extends to space activities conducted by
private entities.26 The international liability of states has been further specified in the
Liability Convention through more specific and elaborate provisions.27 For exam-
ple, Article II of the Liability Convention stipulates that states have absolute liabil-
ity for damage caused by a space object on Earth or to an aircraft that is in flight.
Conversely, Article III of the Liability Convention states that, for damage caused by
the space object in outer space, the liability of the state is determined through fault.
Importantly, the definition of a ‘launching state’ leads to the possibility that there
are multiple launching states for the same space object.28 In such cases, all states
that qualify as a ‘launching state’ will be jointly and severally liable for damage
caused by the space object under Article V of the Liability Convention. The bottom
line, however, remains that states run the risk of having to pay compensation to
other states, or natural or juridical persons of other states, for damage caused by
space objects used in space activities by private entities. Therefore, to prevent or
minimise the risk of having to pay such damages, states naturally seek to gain con-
trol over those activities. Furthermore, states want to ensure indemnification of the
state against the private entity whose space object has caused the damage to prevent
paying excessive amounts of compensation through the inclusion of a right of
recourse.29
Note, however, that there are diverging interpretations on the extent of the defini-
tion of a ‘launching state’. In particular, the diverging interpretation centre on
whether the state of nationality, where the natural person is from or the juridical
person is established, can be designated the ‘launching state’ when a private entity
procures a launch outside its territory. Some argue that a launch by a private entity
does not constitute a launch by the state or procurement of the launch by that state,
26
1 (Carl Heymanns Verlag 2009), 135
27
Lesley-Jane Smith & Armel Kerrest, ‘Historical Background and Context LIAB’ in Stephan
Commentary on Space Law, vol 2 (Carl Heymanns Verlag 2013), 98
28
Armel Kerrest de Rozavel & Frans von der Dunk, ‘Liability and Insurance in the Context of
National Authorisation’ in Frans von der Dunk (ed), National Space Legislation in Europe
(Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 2011), 126 | Bin Cheng, Studies in International Space Law
(Clarendon University Press 1997), 613
29
Outer Space in Society, Politics and Law (SpringerWienNewYork 2011), 443
while others argue that, based upon the Resolution on the Concept of the ‘Launching
State’ and the Resolution on Enhancing Registration and the Registration
Convention, the state would be designated as the ‘launching state’.30 Although this
debate has not been unequivocally settled, Article VII of the Outer Space Treaty
nevertheless prompts states to enact national space legislation, at the very least to
ensure that they can seek indemnification for compensation paid pursuant to their
international liability for space activities conducted by private entities.
2.3 Jurisdiction, Control and Registration
The final provision that establishes a direct link between states and space activities
conducted by private entities is Article VIII of the Outer Space Treaty, which
stipulates:
A State Party to the Treaty on whose registry an object launched into outer space is carried
shall retain jurisdiction and control over such object, and over any personnel thereof, while
in outer space or on a celestial body. Ownership of objects launched into outer space,
including objects landed or constructed on a celestial body, and of their component parts, is
not affected by their presence in outer space or on a celestial body or by their return to the
Earth. Such objects or component parts found beyond the limits of the State Party to the
Treaty on whose registry they are carried shall be returned to that State Party, which shall,
upon request, furnish identifying data prior to their return.
The importance of this Article is twofold. First, it establishes that an object

launched into outer space shall be registered. This obligation is elaborated in the
Registration Convention, which specifies in Article I(c) that the State of Registry is
the ‘launching state’. The definition of a ‘launching state’ brings with it the same
uncertainty as under Article VII of the Outer Space Treaty, especially with respect
to the procurement of a launch. Likewise, interpretation of the provisions of
international space law indicates that states whose national private entities procure
the launch of a space object fall within the definition of a ‘launching state’.31
As the concept of a ‘launching state’ allows for more than one state to be a
launching state, Article II(2) of the Registration Convention stipulates that the
launching states of the space object shall jointly determine which state shall register
the object. The Registration Convention further stipulates the obligation to register
nationally, under Article II (1), and to pass on required information to the Secretary
General of the United Nations, under Article IV. Although the Registration
Convention does not determine which information needs to be registered in the
30
1 (Carl Heymanns Verlag 2009), 137–138 | Michael Gerhard, ‘Article VI’ in Stephan Hobe,
Bernhard Schmidt-Tedd, Kai-Uwe Schrogl (eds) & Gérardine Goh (assistant ed), Cologne
Commentary on Space Law, vol 1 (Carl Heymanns Verlag 2009), 115–116
31
Bernhard Schmidt-Tedd & Stephan Mick, ‘Article VIII’ in Stephan Hobe, Bernhard Schmidt-
Tedd, Kai-Uwe Schrogl (eds) & Gérardine Goh (assistant ed), Cologne Commentary on Space
Law, vol 1 (Carl Heymanns Verlag 2009), 152–153
2.4 Interim Conclusion 13
national registry, it does determine which information will need to be furnished to

the Secretary General of the United Nations. In Article IV (1), it is stipulated that at
least the following information must be provided: the name of the launching state or
states; an appropriate designator of the space object or its registration number; the
date and territory or location of launch; basic orbital parameters, including the nodal
period, inclination, apogee and perigee; and the general function of the space object.
Both these obligations, to register a space object for which the state is the ‘launch-
ing state’ nationally and to furnish information to the Secretary General of the
United Nations, motivate the enactment of national space legislation to adhere to the
obligations.32
Second, this Article establishes that the State of Registry has jurisdiction and
control over the space object. As such, the State of Registry is the state that is inter-
nationally responsible under Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty as it has jurisdic-
tion over the space object.
2.4 Interim Conclusion
These direct obligations upon states with respect to space activities conducted by
private entities provide a clear motivation to enact national space legislation.
Through national space legislation, states can ensure that they adhere to their inter-
national obligations, secure their interests and limit the risks associated with space
activities. However, as has already been shown with respect to the definition of a
‘launching state’, each state will have a different approach towards adhering to its
international obligations. Indeed the Resolution on National Legislation states that
‘States have adapted their national legal frameworks according to their specific
needs and practical considerations and that national legal requirements depend to a
high degree on the range of space activities conducted and the level of involvement
of non-governmental entities’.33 Therefore, this report will discuss the national legal
frameworks of selected states to highlight the similarities and the differences
between their respective frameworks.
32
Bernhard Schmidt-Tedd & Stephan Mick, ‘Article VIII’ in Stephan Hobe, Bernhard Schmidt-
Tedd, Kai-Uwe Schrogl (eds) & Gérardine Goh (assistant ed), Cologne Commentary on Space
Law, vol 1 (Carl Heymanns Verlag 2009), 165 | Irmgard Marboe, ‘National Space Legislation’ in
Christian Brünner & Alexander Soucek (eds), Outer Space in Society, Politics and Law
(SpringerWienNewYork 2011), 442–443
33
Resolution on National Legislation, preamble | Tare Brisibe, ‘Preambular Paragraphs’ in Stephan
Commentary on Space Law, vol 3 (Carl Heymanns Verlag 2015), 555
Chapter 3
National Space Legislation
Abstract This chapter will discuss the selected national space legislation in chron-
ological order based on the date the main act was first adopted, i.e. Sweden (Sect.
3.1), the UK (Sect. 3.2), Australia (Sect. 3.3), China (Sect. 3.4), Belgium (Sect. 3.5),
the Netherlands (Sect. 3.6), France (Sect. 3.7), Austria (Sect. 3.8), Indonesia (Sect.
3.9), Denmark (Sect. 3.10) and New Zealand (Sect. 3.11). Each analysis will follow
the same model. First, the analysis will consist of a discussion of the rationale and
policy underlying the decision to enact national space legislation. Although the
main rationale for enacting national space legislation will coincide with the general
rationale set out in the previous chapter, the rationale will still be discussed per
country. This is to highlight more unique considerations and give a more complete
and precise overview of each state’s national space legislation. Second, the scope of
the legislation will be determined. This determination will include the ratione loci,
ratione materiae and ratione personae of the legislation, i.e. to which activities the
legislation is applicable geographically, to which types of activities the legislation is
applicable and to whom the legislation is applicable. Finally, the content of the leg-
islation will be ascertained. Primarily, the regulation of authorisation, insurance,
recourse and liability, registration, environmental protection and enforcement of the
legislation will be discussed because they are regulated in each jurisdiction.
Furthermore, some legislation regulates additional matters, such as the measures
and obligations that need to be taken when an incident occurs and the return of
space objects of other states that have returned to Earth on the territory or under the
jurisdiction of the state. These additional subjects will also be considered for each
jurisdiction that regulates them. Procedural, administrative and technical require-
ments will not be discussed in detail. The procedural and administrative require-
ments are country specific and do not specifically pertain to space law as such, while
the technical requirements can be very extensive and specific.

16 3 National Space Legislation
3.1 Sweden: Act on Space Activities of 1982
3.1.1 Rationale
Sweden enacted its Act on Space Activities in 1982.1 In the memorandum to the
draft,2 it is stated that the national implementation of international obligations deriv-
ing from the corpus iuris spatialis internationalis provided the dominant motive for
promulgating the national space legislation.3 However, beyond this general ratio-
nale, the motivation to enact national space legislation came from the planned
launches of a number of satellites and technological developments at the time, mak-
ing it necessary to take legislative action.4 In particular, Sweden believed that it was
likely that private Swedish entities would start conducting space activities in the
near future because of the increased need for telecommunications and the commer-
cialisation of payload space on launchers.5 Furthermore, although the Swedish
Space Corporation is state-owned and primarily responsible for managing govern-
mental space activities, it is still an independent juridical person that conducts space
activities, such as the launch of the Viking satellite, without the Swedish state hav-
ing complete control over the projects.6
There have been substantial technological and legal developments since the
enactment of the Act. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that closer examination of
the Act on Space Activities has been recommended.7 The specific reason for revis-
ing the Act specifically lies in the development of activities with respect to the
Esrange Space Centre.8 Furthermore, satellites, space tourism and developments in
international codes of conduct and other regulations are considered, including the
1
Lag om rymdverksamhet av den 18 november 1982, SFS 1982:963 (Act on Space Activities of 18
November 1982, SFS 1982:963, SE) [hereinafter: Swedish Act on Space Activities]
2
Regeringens proposition om lag om rymdverksamhet beslutad den 29 april 1982, Prop.
1981/82:226 (Government Draft on the law on space activities adopted 29 April 1982, Prop.
1981/82:226, SE) [hereinafter: Swedish Draft on Space Activities]
3
Swedish Draft Law on Space Activities, 4 | Frans von der Dunk, ‘Current and Future Development
of National Space Law and Policy’ in Proceedings of United Nations/Brazil Workshop on Space
Law: Dissemination and Developing International and National Space Law: The Latin American
and Caribbean Perspective (United Nations 2005) <http://www.unoosa.org/res/oosadoc/data/doc-
uments/2005/stspace/stspace28_0_html/st_space_28E.pdf> accessed 30 June 2017, 42 | Niklas
Hedman, ‘National Space Law in Selected Countries’ in Christian Brünner & Edith Walter (eds),
Nationales Weltraumrecht/National Space Law (Böhlau 2008), 74 | Sweden has signed and ratified
the Outer Space Treaty, the Rescue Agreement, the Liability Convention and the Registration
Convention, see: UNCOPUOS Legal Subcommittee, Status of International Agreements Relating
to Activities in Outer Space as at 1 January 2017 (2017) UN Doc A/AC.105/C.2/2017/CRP.7, 10
4
Swedish Draft on Space Activities, 4 & 7–8
5
Swedish Draft on Space Activities, 8
6
7
Regeringskansliet, En rymdstrategi för nytta och tillväxt (SOU 2015:75), 122
8
3.1 Sweden: Act on Space Activities of 1982 17
mitigation of space debris.9 The intent of the examination of the current Act is to
determine whether a revision could result in more clarity and thus encourage private
investors to invest in Sweden, for example, in suborbital space activities.10 However,
a draft has not yet been submitted.
3.1.2 Scope of the Legislation
The ratione materiae of the Swedish Act on Space Activities extends to activities in
outer space.11 However, the Act does not define ‘outer space’ as such delimitation
was considered to be a moot point because no agreement on the delimitation exists
internationally.12 Instead the Act sets out which activities are considered to be space
activities. First, it affirms that activities that take place entirely in outer space, the
launching of objects and all measures to manoeuvre or affect objects launched into
outer space in any other manner are considered space activities.13 This also includes
bringing space objects in orbit around other celestial bodies – all of which are
clearly space activities in accordance with the Outer Space Treaty.14 Second, the
scope of the Act excludes receiving signals or information from objects in outer
space and the launching of sounding rockets.15 The exclusion of these activities is
based upon the fact that one merely constitutes receiving information and the other
is not designated as a space activity internationally according to Sweden.16 Although
not specified in the Act, and perhaps rather obvious, the manufacturing of compo-
nents for space objects or equipment for space activities is not regarded as a space
activity.17
As far as the ratione loci and ratione personae of the Act are considered, the
scope of application covers space activities conducted from the Swedish territory by
someone other than the Swedish state and space activities carried out by Swedish
natural or juridical persons anywhere else.18 The starting point utilised by Sweden
is that Sweden cannot exercise jurisdiction over activities of a foreign juridical
entity; instead the state under whose law this juridical person has been established
and the state from where the activities are actually conducted are the appropriate
states to exercise jurisdiction.19 The decision to extend the application of the Act to
9
Regeringskansliet, En rymdstrategi för nytta och tillväxt (SOU 2015:75), 122–123
10
11
Swedish Act on Space Activities, Section 1(1)
12
13
Swedish Act on Space Activities, Section 1(1) & Section 1(2)
14
15
16
17
18
Swedish Act on Space Activities, Section 2
19
Swedish Draft on Space Activities, 9–10
Swedish nationals conducting their space activities outside the Swedish territory is
based upon the Swedish interpretation of Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty.
According to this interpretation, it would contravene the spirit, object and purpose
of the treaty to limit the international responsibility of the state only to activities
conducted from its territory.20 Furthermore, private entities would then be able to
circumvent the regulation of their activities by conducting space activities from
areas beyond national jurisdiction.21 Therefore, Sweden exercises both its territorial
and personal jurisdiction to adhere to its obligation under Article VI of the Outer
Space Treaty. In a nutshell national activities, in the context of Article VI of the
Outer Space Treaty, include space activities carried out from the territory of Sweden
and/or by natural or legal persons anywhere else.
3.1.3 Subject Matter of the Legislation
3.1.3.1 Authorisation
The Outer Space Treaty requires the activities of private entities in outer space to be
authorised by the appropriate state. Sweden has chosen to grant such authorisation
through a licencing system, whereby space activities are prohibited for any private
entity unless prior permission is granted.22 The power to grant a licence is vested in
the Swedish government.23 The decision to keep the power to grant or refuse a
licence on the governmental level is based on the fact that such licences might be
important from a foreign policy point of view.24 Furthermore, the number of appli-
cations was estimated to be relatively small in the foreseeable future, which makes
it unnecessary to delegate the licencing.25 The application for a licence shall be
submitted to the Swedish National Space Board in accordance with the Decree on
Space Activities.26 The Board is required to consult the Swedish Post and Telecom
Authority or other ministries or authorities affected by the application and submit
the results of this consultation together with a statement by the Swedish National
Space Board to the Government.27
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Förordning om rymdverksamhet av den 25 november 1982, SFS 1982:1069, Section 1 (Decree
on Space Activities of 25 November 1982, SFS 1982:1069, SE, Section 1) [hereinafter: Swedish
Decree on Space Activities]
27
Swedish Decree on Space Activities, Section 1
3.1 Sweden: Act on Space Activities of 1982 19
To adhere to the international responsibility under Article VI of the Outer Space

Treaty,28 the licence may be restricted taking into account the circumstances of each
case or set out conditions to control the activity or for other reasons.29 Neither the
Act nor the Decree specifies what type of restrictions or conditions may be imposed
on the licence. However, the restrictions need to be appropriate and consistent with
the conditions set out in the licence and can, for example, limit the type of activities
and the duration of the activities.30 To determine what restrictions and conditions are
appropriate, the licence application must accurately describe the intended activi-
ties.31 The restrictions and conditions are thus set out on a case-by-case basis.
In the case of a breach of the conditions set out in the licence or in the case of excep-
tional reasons, the licence can be revoked.32 Similar to granting the licence, the power
to revoke a licence lies with the government.33 Because of the significant consequences
it has for the licence holder, the revocation of a licence requires a serious reason.34 The
circumstances that can lead to revocation of the licence depend on the conditions set
out in the licence.35 The ‘exceptional reasons’ are not explicitly stipulated but can,
for example, be projects that pose an unnecessary risk for Sweden without the activi-
ties being in conflict with general obligations or conditions.36 Considering whether to
revoke a licence requires a thorough deliberation,37 and the licence can be revoked
temporarily, while a final decision is taken on the revocation.38
3.1.3.2 Insurance
Insurance is not addressed in a separate provision in the Swedish Act on Space

Activities. However, the requirement to take out insurance to cover damage that is
caused by the space object utilised in the space activity can be stipulated as a condi-
tion included in the licence. Furthermore, since a right of recourse of the Swedish
state against private entities is included in the Act, private entities have a strong incen-
tive to procure insurance for the activities they carry out considering the dangerous
and ultrahazardous environment of outer space. Nevertheless, private entities appear
to not take out insurance for their activities that fall within the scope of the Act.39
28
29
30
Swedish Draft on Space Activities, 11 & 15
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
Niklas Hedman, ‘Swedish Legislation on Space Activities‘ in Christian Brünner & Edith Walter,
Nationales Weltraumrecht/National Space Law (Böhlau 2008), 77
3.1.3.3 Recourse and Liability
Sweden recognises that it can be held internationally liable for damage caused by a
space object of a private entity.40 The international liability of Sweden, even for
damage incurred as a result of activities of private entities, motivates the inclusion
of a provision that allows Sweden to recover compensation paid for such damage.41
Therefore, the Act bestows a right of recourse against private entities whose activi-
ties have led to the liability of Sweden under international space law.42 The Act does
not explicitly limit the amount of compensation for which Sweden can seek recourse.
Therefore, the amount of compensation that can be recovered is the full compensa-
tion paid by Sweden. The obligation to reimburse Sweden is not contingent upon
fault of the private entity, at least as far as damage on Earth or aircraft in flight is
considered, as international space law mandates absolute liability.43 Consequently,
having the financial ability to reimburse Sweden can be one of the restrictions or
conditions to be granted the licence. Thus, private entities may be required to take
out insurance or provide financial guarantees or securities. Although the conditions
are not further specified, the Act does make an exception to the utilisation of the
right of recourse when there are specific reasons against it.44 These specific reasons
might make it reasonable that the repayment obligation is reduced or eliminated.45
However, no examples are given of specific reasons that could lead to the reduction
or elimination of the obligation to indemnify.
3.1.3.4 Registration
The Act does not address the obligation to register objects launched into outer
space; instead, the Decree on Space Activities mandates the Swedish National
Space Board to keep a national registry of space objects for which Sweden is the
launching state in accordance with Article I of the Registration Convention.46 The
content of the register is almost the same as the information that needs to be fur-
nished to the Secretary General of the United Nations under Article IV of the
Registration Convention. Namely, the register shall contain a designation or reg-
istration number of the space object; the date and territory or location of launch-
ing; basic orbital parameters such as the nodal period, inclination, apogee and
perigee; and the general use of the space object. If another state besides Sweden
may also be considered a launching state, the space object shall only be registered
40
Swedish Draft on Space Activities, 12–13
41
42
43
44
45
46
Swedish Decree on Space Activities, Section 4
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
Fig. 105. Fig. 106.
The feather edge which is formed on the inside is removed by a

few strokes of a stone called a slip. Hold the slip firmly against the
face so as not to form a bevel. Fig. 106. Slips are of various sizes;
one that fits the curvature of the gouge should be selected.
56. Sharpening Plane-Irons.—Plane-irons are sharpened straight
across like the chisel, with the
exception of the jack plane, as previously noted. Their corners,
however, are very slightly rounded off to prevent their leaving marks
on the wood. Where one plane is made to serve the purpose of
smooth, jack and fore-plane, it should be ground straight across. In
whetting, increase the pressure on the edges alternately so as to
turn up a heavier feather edge there than in the middle, thus
rounding the whole end very slightly. This feather edge may be
removed in the usual manner.
57. To Tell Whether a Tool is Sharp or Not.—Examine the
cutting edge, holding
the tool toward the light. If the tool is dull, the cutting edge will
appear as a white line, the broader the line the blunter the edge. Fig.
107 A. If the tool is sharp, no white line can be seen. Fig. 107 B.
Fig. 107. Fig. 108.
A better way—the method a mechanic would use—is to test the

edge by drawing the thumb along it lightly. Fig. 108. If the tool is
sharp one can feel the edge “taking hold.” If dull, the thumb will slide
along the edge as it would along the back of a knife blade.
Good judgment is necessary in this test or a cut on the thumb may
be the result. No pressure is required, just a touch along the edge at
various points.
What actually takes place is this: The cutting edge, if sharp, cuts
the outer layer, the callous part of the ball of the thumb, just a little.
The sense of feeling is so keen that the resulting friction, slight as it
is, is transferred to the brain of the worker long before any injury
need be done the thumb. If the tool is dull, no cut, hence no friction
can result. Do not use the finger, as it is not calloused as is the
thumb.
CHAPTER VI.
Form Work, Modeling.
58. Making a Cylinder.—The cylinder is evolved from the square

prism by increasing the number of sides
until a prism is formed with so many sides that its surface can be
easily transformed into a cylinder by means of sandpaper.
Fig. 109.
(1) Begin by making a square prism which shall have the same
dimensions for its width and thickness as is desired for the diameter
of the cylinder. (2) Change this square prism to a regular octagonal
or eight-sided prism by planing off the four arrises. The gage lines
which indicate the amount to be taken off of each arris are made by
holding the gage block against each of the surfaces and gaging from
each arris each way, two lines on each surface. These lines must be
made lightly. The distance at which to set the spur of the gage from
the head is equal to one-half the diagonal of the square end of the
prism. Fig. 109. Since the ends are less likely to be accurate than
any other part, it is advisable to get this distance as follows: Lay off
two lines on the working face a distance apart equal to the width of
the prism. These lines with the two arrises form a square the
diagonal of which can be measured and one-half of it computed.
Fig. 110.
Carpenters in working on large timbers lay the steel-square

diagonally across so that there are twenty-four divisions from arris to
arris. They then mark off the timber at seven and seventeen inches.
Fig. 110. These numbers, while not mathematically correct, are near
enough for practical purposes. In planing the arrises off, the piece
may be held in the vise or placed against the bench-stop. Fig. 111.
Care must be taken not to plane over the lines, for not only is the
one side enlarged, but the adjacent side is lessened, thus
exaggerating the error. (3) Judging with the eye the amount to take
off, plane the eight arrises until there are sixteen equal sides.
Fig. 111.
Again plane the arrises, making the piece thirty-two sided. On a

small piece this will be sufficient; if the piece is large, the process
may be continued until the piece is practically a cylinder. (4) To finish
a small cylinder wrap a piece of sandpaper around it, rub lengthwise
until the surface of the wood is smooth and the piece feels like a
cylinder when revolved in the hand.
59. The Spokeshave.—Fig. 112. The spokeshave is used
principally to smooth curved surfaces. It
may be drawn toward or pushed away from the worker, whichever is
more convenient. By means of screws, the blade may be adjusted to
take light or heavy shavings. The spokeshave is practically a short
plane with handles at the sides, and in using it the aim should be, as
with the plane, to secure silky shavings of as great length as the
nature of the work will allow.
Fig. 112.
60. Making Curved Edges.—To make curved edges on a board,

finger-gage on each side lines which
shall indicate the amount of curvature. Fig. 113.
Fig. 113.
If the curve is to be a gradual one reaching from one of these lines

over the middle of the edge to the other two lines should also be
finger-gaged on the edge. Finger-gage from each side using a
distance equal to one-fourth the whole thickness of the piece.
Fig. 114. Fig. 115.
With the spokeshave, Fig. 114, carefully cut off the two arrises to
the pencil lines so as to form two bevels. This gives three surfaces to
the edge of the board. Estimating the amount with the eye, cut off
the two arrises formed by these three surfaces until five equal
surfaces are formed in their place. This process may be repeated
until the surface of the edge is practically a curved surface. With a
piece of sandpaper held as shown in Fig. 115, rub until the surface is
smooth and evenly curved.
61. Modeling.—This term is used to apply to the method of
making objects of such irregular form that the
judgment of the worker must be depended upon to give the correct
result without the aid of gage and knife marks. The forming of a
canoe paddle or a hammer handle are good illustrations.
Fig. 116.
Generally a little forethought will show a way in which the piece of

work may be partly laid out with knife, square and rule. To illustrate,
take the hammer handle, Fig. 116. The steps would be as follows:
First, plane a face side and a face edge, and square the two ends so
that the piece shall have the length desired for the finished handle.
Second, draw a center line on the face side, parallel to the face edge
and lay off on either side of this the two straight lines which shall
indicate the amount of taper; also sketch in the lines of curvature.
Plane the two edges to the tapering lines and square with the face
side. Then cut to the curved lines, keeping this surface also square
with the face side. In a similar manner, lay off on the face edge a
center line parallel to the face side, mark the taper and lines of
curvature, and work these surfaces as in the second step. Third, the
piece may be laid off still further by drawing on the larger end the
form of the ellipse which that end is to assume. With spokeshave,
judging the curves of the middle with the eye, work out the desired
form. The steel scraper is to be used for finishing after the piece has
been made as smooth as is possible with the spokeshave.
CHAPTER VII.
1. Laying Out Duplicate Parts. 2. Scraping and
Sandpapering. 3. Fastening Parts.
62. Laying out Duplicate Parts.—Frequently a piece of work will

require the making of two or more
like parts. To lay out these parts, that is, to mark out the location of
intended gains, mortises, shoulders of tenons, etc., so that all shall
be alike, the following method is used: (1) On the face edge of one of
the pieces measure off with the rule and mark with knife the points at
which the lines for the joints are to be squared across. If knife marks
would show on the finished surface as scratches, use a sharp pencil
instead. (2) Lay the pieces on the bench top with the face edges up;
even the ends with the try-square. Fig. 117. Square lines across the
edges of all of them at the points previously marked on one of them.
The pieces may then be separated and lines corresponding to the
lines just made on the face edges, be carried across the face sides
of each piece separately, the try-square beam being held against the
face edge in so doing, of course.
Fig. 117.
In all duplicate work the aim of the worker should be to make as

much use as possible of the tool he has in hand before laying it
down and taking another. To illustrate, if there should be a number of
like parts each requiring two different settings of the gage, he should
mark all of the parts at the first setting, then all at the second setting
rather than to change the gage for each piece so that each piece
might be completely marked before another is begun.
63. Scraping.—In smoothing hard wood surfaces, a scraper will
be found helpful. If the grain should happen to be
crossed or curled, a scraper will become a necessity. The plane-iron
may be made ever so sharp and the cap-iron set ever so close to the
cutting edge, still the surface of some woods will tear. Sandpaper
must not be depended upon to smooth a torn surface.
Fig. 118.
Cabinet scrapers for plane and convex surface work are

rectangular pieces of saw steel. Fig. 118 shows a swan-neck scraper
suitable for smoothing concave surfaces.
Beginners frequently mistake surfaces which have been planed at
a mill for smooth surfaces. They are not; and, unless the “hills and
hollows” which extend across the surface of every mill-planed piece
of lumber are removed before the finish of stain or filler is applied,
the result will be very unsatisfactory.
These “hills and hollows” are present even in the smoothest of
mill-plane surfaces. The reason is easily understood. When a board
is mill-planed, it is run through a machine which has a flat bed over
which the board is moved and above which revolve two knives. Fig.
119. Unless the grain of wood is very badly crossed or curled, it will
be found very much easier, and time will be saved if the mill marks
are removed with a smooth-plane before the scraper is applied.
A—Delivery Roller. D—Roller. G—Work Table.
B—Cutter Head. E—Roller. H—Knives.
C—Feed Roller. F—Board.
Fig. 119.
Scrapers may be pushed or pulled. Fig. 120. When properly

sharpened thin silky shavings will be cut off. The cutting edge of a
scraper is a bur which is formed at an arris and turned at very nearly
a right angle to the surface of the scraper.
Fig. 120. Fig. 121.
When a scraper becomes dull (1) each edge is drawfiled, Fig. 121,
so as to make it square and straight, with the corners slightly
rounded. Sometimes the edges are rounded slightly from end to end
to prevent digging. Frequently the scraper has its edges and
surfaces ground square on an oilstone after the drawfiling that the
arrises may be formed into smoother burs. (2) After filing, the
scraper is laid flat on the bench and the arrises forced over as in Fig.
122. The tool used is called a burnisher; any smooth piece of steel
would do. (3) Next, turn these arrises back over the side of the
scraper. Fig. 123. Great pressure is not necessary to form the burs
properly.
Fig. 122. Fig. 123.

64. Sandpapering.—To know when to use and when not to use
sandpaper is as much the sign of a good
workman as to know how to use the tools.
Sandpaper should never be used until all tool work has been done
as well, and carried as far as is possible. Sandpaper is, as its name
implies, sand paper. In sanding a surface, this fine sand becomes
imbedded in the wood and should an edged tool be used thereon it
will be dulled. Slovenly work should never be done in expectation of
using sandpaper to fix it up. This practice is dishonest. Sandpaper
should not be expected to do the work of edged tools or
disappointment will follow. The sandpaper sheet, for use, is usually
divided into four parts, one of these parts being of good size for large
work.
Fig. 124.
For flat surfaces these pieces are placed on a sandpaper block.

This block is but a piece of wood squared up to a length equal to that
of the piece of paper and to such a width that the edges of the paper
will extend far enough up the edges of the block to allow the fingers
to grasp them firmly. Fig. 124. Do not waste the paper by wrapping it
around in such a way as to throw part of it on top of the block. The
block should be held flat upon the surface when sanding near an
arris, otherwise the arris will be rounded. The arrises should be kept
sharp unless on a table leg, arm of a chair or something similar, in
which the sharp arrises would be likely to injure the hand or become
splintered through usage. In such cases the sandpaper may be run
along the arrises once or twice, just enough to remove the
sharpness. Sometimes the plane is set shallow and drawn over the
arris after the surfaces have been squared, to remove the
sharpness.
On curved surfaces, the sandpaper is held free in the hand, no
block being used. Fig. 115 illustrates the manner of sanding the
convex curve of the coat hanger. The sandpaper should be rubbed
along the grain and the rubbing should proceed only long enough to
smooth the piece and to bring out the grain clearly.
On the back of a piece of sandpaper will be found a number. This
number indicates the relative coarseness of the sand sprinkled upon
the glue covered paper. 00, 0, 1, 1¹⁄₂ and 2 are the numbers
commonly used; 00 being finest and 2 relatively coarse. On table
tops and surfaces which are not very smooth to begin with, the
coarse sandpaper is first used, this is followed by the next in
coarseness and so on until the finest is used.
Never attempt to sandpaper surfaces or parts which are to be put
together later on to form joints, the edge tools alone must be
depended upon to secure proper smoothing.
65. Hammers.—Fig. 125 shows the two kinds of hammers most
commonly used by workers in wood. The plain
faced hammer has a flat face and is somewhat easier to learn to use
than the bell-faced hammer, which has a slightly rounded face. The
advantage of the bell-faced hammer lies in one’s ability to better set
a nail slightly below the surface without the assistance of the nailset.
This is a very great advantage on outside or on rough carpenter
work. This setting of the nail with the hammer leaves a slight
depression, however, in the wood, and is therefore not suited for
inside finishing.
Fig. 125.
The handle of the hammer is purposely made quite long and

should be grasped quite near the end.
66. Nails.—Nails originally were forged by hand and were
therefore very expensive. Later strips were cut from
sheets of metal and heads were hammered upon these by means of
the blacksmith’s hammer, the vise being used to hold the strips
meanwhile. These were called cut nails. Early in the nineteenth
century a machine was invented which cut the nails from the sheet
metal and headed them.
Steel wire nails have about supplanted the cut nails for most
purposes. They are made by a machine which cuts the wire from a
large reel, points and heads the pieces thus cut off.
Wire nails, like cut nails, are roughly classed by woodworkers as
common, finishing and casing nails. Thin nails with small heads are
called brads. Wire nails are bought and sold by weight, the size of
wire according to the standard wire gage and the length in inches
being taken into consideration in specifying the size and fixing the
price per pound.
In former practice, the size of nails was specified according to the
number of pounds that one thousand of any variety would weigh.
Thus the term sixpenny and eightpenny referred to varieties which
would weigh six and eight pounds per thousand, respectively, penny
being a corruption of pound. In present practice, certain sizes are still
roughly specified as three, four, six, eight, ten, twenty and thirty
penny.
Fig. 126.
Common wire nails are thick and have large flat heads. They are
used in rough work where strength is desired. Fig. 126 A. Finishing
nails, Fig. 126 B, are used for fine work such as inside woodwork,
cabinet work, etc. Casing nails, Fig. 126 C, are somewhat thicker
and stronger than finishing nails; they have small heads.
67. Nailing.—Especial care is necessary in starting cut nails. Fig.
127 shows two views of a cut nail. From these it will be
seen that the sides of the nail form a wedge in one of the views while
in the other they are parallel. The nail should be so started that the
wedging action shall take place along, not across the grain.
Fig. 127. Fig. 128.
In nailing through one piece into the edge of another, assume a

position so that you can look along the piece into the edge of which
you are nailing. Fig. 128. If the nail is to be driven plumb, it must be
sighted from two directions several times in the beginning of the
nailing. Having driven the points of the nails slightly below the
surface of the first piece, adjust the two pieces properly, force the

Textbook National Space Legislation A Comparative and Evaluative Analysis 1St Edition Annette Froehlich Ebook All Chapter PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Textbook National Space Legislation A Comparative and Evaluative Analysis 1St Edition Annette Froehlich Ebook All Chapter PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

National Space Legislation A

Comparative and Evaluative Analysis

Space Fostering African Societies Developing the

Integrated Space for African Society Legal and Policy

Space Fostering Latin American Societies Developing the

The United Nations and Space Security: Conflicting

Embedding Space in African Society The United Nations

Reconsidering Constitutional Formation I National

China s Energy Efficiency and Conservation Household

Evaluative Perception Anna Bergqvist

Editorial Advisory Board:

National Space Legislation

ISSN 1868-5307 ISSN 1868-5315 (electronic)

Library of Congress Control Number: 2018930350

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Printed on acid-free paper

3.5 Belgium: Act on the Activities of Launching, Flight

5 Comparative Analysis of National Space Legislation �������������������������� 137

Annette Froehlich is a scientific expert seconded from the German Aerospace

Alexander Gairiseb is on secondment from the Ministry of Works and Transport

Ega Muhammad Megah is an LL.M. graduate from the International Institute of

1.1 The Setting

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018 1

regulating outer space.4 Accordingly, an increasing number of states have enacted or

1.2 Approach of the Study

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018 5

Recommendations on National Legislation Relevant to the Peaceful Exploration

2.1 International Responsibility, Authorisation

the activity that is internationally responsible.21 Both the travaux préparatoires of

2.2 International Liability

2.3 Jurisdiction, Control and Registration

The importance of this Article is twofold. First, it establishes that an object

national registry, it does determine which information will need to be furnished to

2.4 Interim Conclusion

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018 15

3.1 Sweden: Act on Space Activities of 1982

3.1.2 Scope of the Legislation

3.1.3 Subject Matter of the Legislation

To adhere to the international responsibility under Article VI of the Outer Space

Insurance is not addressed in a separate provision in the Swedish Act on Space

3.1.3.3 Recourse and Liability

The feather edge which is formed on the inside is removed by a

A better way—the method a mechanic would use—is to test the

58. Making a Cylinder.—The cylinder is evolved from the square

Carpenters in working on large timbers lay the steel-square

Again plane the arrises, making the piece thirty-two sided. On a

60. Making Curved Edges.—To make curved edges on a board,

If the curve is to be a gradual one reaching from one of these lines

Fig. 114. Fig. 115.

Generally a little forethought will show a way in which the piece of

Sandpapering. 3. Fastening Parts.

62. Laying out Duplicate Parts.—Frequently a piece of work will

In all duplicate work the aim of the worker should be to make as

Cabinet scrapers for plane and convex surface work are

Scrapers may be pushed or pulled. Fig. 120. When properly

Fig. 122. Fig. 123.

For flat surfaces these pieces are placed on a sandpaper block.

The handle of the hammer is purposely made quite long and

In nailing through one piece into the edge of another, assume a

You might also like

3.5 Belgium: Act on the Activities of Launching, Flight

5 Comparative Analysis of National Space Legislation �� 137

1.1 The Setting

1.2 Approach of the Study

2.1 International Responsibility, Authorisation

2.2 International Liability

2.3 Jurisdiction, Control and Registration

2.4 Interim Conclusion

3.1 Sweden: Act on Space Activities of 1982

3.1.2 Scope of the Legislation

3.1.3 Subject Matter of the Legislation

3.1.3.3 Recourse and Liability