CYIL 2012

JAKUB HANDRLICA CYIL 3 ȍ2012Ȏ scheme and mechanisms to ensure the availability of funds in the event of damage caused by a nuclear accident. ” 8 Consequently, a discussion began in order to tackle the question of how to reach a harmonised nuclear liability regime in the European Union and how to deal with the obstacles and uncertainties arising from the current “labyrinth” of international treaties. 9 Several solutions have been presented in a legal study titled “ Accession of Euratom to the Paris Convention on Third Party Liability in the Field of Nuclear Energy”, which was published in December of 2009. 10 These proposed options vary from a solution by means of international law, which would be reached if all member states accede to the Paris Convention as Amended by the 2004 Protocol, to solutions which are based exclusively on the means of secondary legislation. The accident in the nuclear power plant Fukushima Dai-ichi triggered a more detailed interest of the European Commission in the problems of the nuclear liability “labyrinth.” Only a few weeks after the Fukushima Dai-ichi accident, the first meeting of the newly established “Expert Group on Nuclear Third Party Liability” took place in Luxembourg. Until now, 11 four regular meetings of the “Expert Group” have taken place, discussing different problems of nuclear insurance, jurisdiction in nuclear matters, cooperation among the insurers in the case of an accident, etc. A special meeting was held in Paris in order to discuss the problem of the liability limits and of unlimited liability especially. It is envisaged that the “Expert Group” will finish its work by the end of 2012, presenting its finding and recommendation to the European Commission, which will thereafter act accordingly. 1.3 Scope of this study It will take time for the “Expert Group” to submit its finding to the European Commission in order to identify possibilities for how to tackle the problems of the nuclear third party “labyrinth” existing in the European Union. However, at this stage we may already analyse a number of interesting theoretical questions arising from the relation between international and European law regarding each of the existing harmonization options. Obviously, nuclear third party liability is currently facing the phenomenon that was once described as “European Exceptionalism” by some authors. 12 That term defines the very special nature of external competencies of 8 COM (2006) 844, at 22. 9 Proceedings from the bi-annual conference of the German regional branch of the International Nuclear Law Association, held in June, 2009, have been published in 2010 and represent a comprehensive overview on the current state of discussion in Europe. See N. Pelzer (ed.), EuropäischesAtomhaftungsrechtimUmbruch (Nomos Verlag, Baden Baden 2010). 10 See TREN/CC/01 – 2005. However, this Report was not approved in any way by the European Commission and should not be relied upon as a statement of Commission views. 11 The article was finished at the beginning of February 2012. 12 E.g. Ličková, M. (2008) ‘European Exceptionalism in International Law’, 19 European Journal of International Law 3, pp. 463 et seqq.

44