CYIL vol. 14 (2023)

JAKUB HANDRLICA CYIL 14 (2023) today, remains covered by the regime of this instrument. The Paris Convention entered into force on 1 April, 1968 and established the first regional regime of nuclear liability worldwide. The fact is that several of the Signatories to the Paris Convention were participants at the International Conference on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage, which was hosted by the IAEA in Vienna from 29 April until 19 May, 1963. Spain and the United Kingdom signed the Vienna Convention, as its original intention was to establish a universal regime of nuclear liability, which would be interconnected with the regional regime, as established under the Paris Convention. 46 Thus, the original intention of the Vienna Convention was to establish an international regime of nuclear liability, which would attract both the states participating in the Paris Convention as well as states being outside that regional treaty. 47 The regime of the Paris Convention also originally foresaw participation of its Contracting Parties in the “Viennese” regime, which was formally facilitated by the Additional Protocol to the Paris Convention, adopted in 1964. 48 However, the realities of the treaty application failed to lead into any interconnection between the Paris and Vienna Conventions. As a matter of fact, both the Paris and Vienna Conventions provide an obligation of the operator to maintain financial security. 49 This aspect has emerged as a key obstacle for any participation of the Contracting Parties to the Paris Convention in the regime, as established by the Vienna Convention. A dual participation in both international regimes would immediately imply a dual obligation for each of the operators. Consequently, neither of the Contracting Parties to the Paris Convention have ever joined the regime of the Vienna Convention. Consequently, a common interpretation has emerged that a dual participation in both the Paris and Vienna regimes of nuclear liability is not viable. 50 This has been the reason that neither of the “Paris” states, which participated at the International Conference on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage have ever ratified the Vienna Convention. 51 The differences between the two regimes of nuclear liability were further aggravated by the adoption of the Convention Supplementary to the Paris Convention (thereinafter “the Brussels Supplementary Convention”). 52 The Brussels Supplementary Convention established a robust framework of subsidiary compensation from public funds, which is entirely missing in the compensation scheme of the Vienna Convention. In similar fashion as the Paris Convention, the Brussels Supplementary Convention was also later amended by the Protocol amending the Brussels Supplementary Convention with the aim to establish a more robust regime of supplementary 46 See LAGORCE, M. Étude comparative des conventions O.C.D.E. et A.I.E.A. sur la responsabilité civile dans le domaine de l’énergie (1960) Aspects de droit de l´ enérgie atomique , at p. 94. 47 Ibid. 48 For further details, see SPLETH, P. ‘The Simultaneous Application of the Paris and Vienna Convention in the Danish Draft Act’ (1970) 6 Nuclear Law Bulletin, pp. 58–66. 49 See HANNAK, K. Das Wiener Übereinkommen über die Haftung auf dem Gebiet von nuklearen Schäden (1980) 4 Archiv für die civilistische Praxis , at pp. 417–418. 50 See PELZER, N. On Harmonizing Nuclear Energy Law, in PELZER, N. (ed), Status, Prospects and Possibilities if International Harmonization in the Field of Nuclear Energy Law , Baden Baden: Nomos Verlag, 1985, at p. 55. 51 Ibid. 52 The Convention of 31 January 1963 Supplementary to the Paris Convention of 29 July 1960 (adopted 31 Jan. 1963), as amended by the Additional Protocol of 1964 (adopted 28 Jan. 1964, entered into force on 4 Dec. 1974) and by the Protocol of 1982 (adopted 16 Nov. 1982, entered into force on 1 Aug. 1991).

304