CYIL vol. 15 (2024)

CYIL 15 ȍ2024Ȏ TOWARD A REGIME FOR CIVIL LIABILITY FOR NUCLEAR DAMAGE IN THE ISLAMIC… Legal Competence to Address Issues Arising from Nuclear Accidents Under the Vienna Convention, the authority to handle legal actions related to a nuclear accident is limited to the courts of the contracting party where the accident took place. 44 This means that only the courts of the country where the incident occurred have the legal jurisdiction to address matters arising from the accident. Centralising legal proceedings in a unified court not only ensures legal clarity but also prevents forum shopping by claimants seeking more favourable judgments. 45 This provision ensures that legal proceedings related to the accident are conducted in the jurisdiction most closely connected to the event itself, providing clarity and consistency in the legal process. If a nuclear incident occurs outside the territory of the contracting parties or in a location that is not precisely determined, the case and jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes will lie with the courts of the state where the facilities are responsibly operated. 46 In the event of a nuclear incident in Iran, we would rely on general principles. Suppose the incident originates from Iranian nuclear facilities since the operation of such facilities is under the responsibility of the Iranian government, both in terms of jurisdiction and within the context of the general legal framework. In that case, Iranian courts have the authority to adjudicate claims from both Iranian nationals and nationals of other countries. However, if the incident stems from nuclear facilities in different countries and occurs in Iran, the country where the facilities are located would be competent, which, in accordance with Iranian regulation, is considered the jurisdiction of the court where the claimant resides. 47 Challenges in Establishing Minimum and Maximum Liability Limits and Iranian Legislation The Revised Vienna Convention introduces a significant increase in minimum liability limits, posing challenges for national legislation tasked with implementing the Protocol of 1997. 48 This discussion mainly focuses on compensable economic damages outlined in the Revised Convention. In Iranian law, while there are limitations on quantifying certain types of damages, general principles such as “La-Zarar” (the principle of No Harm) 49 allow for total compensation for all kinds of damages. Damages compensable under this jurisprudential principle may exceed those under civil liability conventions, posing challenges during the compensation phase. Efforts by legal experts and religious scholars aim to define eligible damages under this principle. Domestic legislators must specify rules for identifying compensable damages within specific provisions or regulations rather than relying solely on the Convention’s referral to domestic law. The absence of such rules may result in unlimited liabilities. 50 On the other hand, determining the maximum liability cap for operators isn’t explicitly outlined in the Vienna Convention, thus falling under the jurisdiction of domestic 44 See the Vienna Convention, Article XI. 45 SHAMSHIRI, A. and FARAHANI, F. A. (n 3) 96. 46 See the Vienna Convention, Article XI. 49 Article 167 of the Iranian Constitution permits recourse to credible Islamic sources in the absence of specific provisions, and Article 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Public and Revolutionary Courts refers to Islamic legal principles, including “La-Zarar”. 50 SHAMSHIRI, A. and FARAHANI, F. A. (n 3) 78. 47 SHAMSHIRI, A. and FARAHANI, F. A. (n 3) 96. 48 HANDRLICA, J. and NOVOTNA, M. (n 8) 59.

277