So here's what I heard in plain English (sort of):

1. Ghana's argument that we and Cote d'Ivoire had a non-treaty based "tacit agreement" regarding a "customary equidistance" boundary failed. But we knew this argument was a long shot. We had to make that argument as any good lawyer would.

2. The Tribunal agreed that the methodology governing the delimitation of the maritime boundary between GH and CI is the equidistance method, thus rejecting CI's angular bisector theory. This, in effect and substance, was our real argument. Although we tactically tried to advance an argument based on history and tacit agreement, we always knew that our strongest argument was one based on geography and jurisprudence. This ruling is the beginning of good of good news for Ghana.

3. The Tribunal rejected our argument that, following geography, our customary equidistance line is the appropriate line to use in this case. Not a big deal

4. Using equidistance methodology, the Tribunal decided that it would not use either of the base points advanced by the two parties as the starting point on land for drawing the line into the sea. The tribunal settled on what it called BP (boundary pillar) 55+ as the starting point for doing the delimitation. We had asked for BP 55 to be used as the starting point on land.

5. The Tribunal then proceeded to set the coordinates along which through line starting on land from BP 55+ into the sea, extending to 200 nautical miles into the sea and beyond.  Where this line actually falls, once plotted on the map, determines who won this case!  If the coordinates cut into any of our existing concessions and productive wells, that would not be ideal for us. I don't think there's a great cause for alarm. We just have to see the new map looks like. 

6. The tribunal rejected all of CI's arguments that certain geography-related special circumstances warranted an adjustment of the resulting equidistance in their favour. It also rejected our argument that the existing customary equidistant line be considered as a special circumstance to adjust the new line in our favor. We had advanced this last argument cleverly and tactically to get us to the same result we sought with without without tacit argument theory.

7. On the whole, a very good decision for Ghana. We just need to see how the final map looks once the coordinates are plotted in the sea using boundary pillar BP 55+ on our common land boundary as a starting point for drawing the new equidistance line.

7. Go and drink or pray.