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

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

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers drives further growth in its UK immigration team with new partner Sophie Barrett-Brown

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal invests in next generation of legal talent as specialist litigation practice grows

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips continues momentum in London with arrival of Catrina Smith

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll