140 / 532
124
JAKUB HANDRLICA
CYIL 5 ȍ2014Ȏ
Way towards a special multilateral treaty: exclusion from the nuclear
liability treaties
Subsequently, after demonstrating that atomic energy could be effectively used to
provide marine propulsion, attention was turned to those maritime issues requiring
amendment. In general, attention was concentrated on the need to provide effective
legal protections for the general public against radiation dangers and other forms of
damage possibly caused by nuclear ships, while not crippling the nascent industry
with an overburden of safeguards.
3
Facing these challenges, efforts led to formulating a multilateral treaty, regulating
matters of nuclear liability arising from the use of nuclear power in marine propulsion
and strongly influenced by the interaction of two groups of international institutions:
those traditionally active in the field of maritime conventions, and those studying
issues of nuclear liability associated with land-based nuclear reactors.
4
At the same
time, the International Atomic Energy Agency and the OECD’s European Nuclear
Energy Agency began preparing multilateral instruments that became the Paris
Convention and the Vienna Convention. However, the text of both conventions
excluded reactors powering ships from their scope of application. Therefore, matters
of nuclear liability for damages incurred by the operation of nuclear-powered vessels
were reserved for a specialized international treaty.
5
In general, the following issues
were considered to be governed by this treaty:
6
First, certain generally accepted principles concerning nuclear liability were
developed and, in principle, widely accepted during negotiations in the late 1950s
and 1960s. According to these principles, the operator should be
absolutely
liable
for any damage caused by a nuclear incident, while all liability is to be
channeled
to
him. Furthermore, the operator’s liability should be
limited
to a specific amount,
which needs to be fully
covered.
All these principles were subsequently accepted in
the provisions of the Paris Convention as well as of the Vienna Convention and there
had been in principle consensus
that these principles should prevail also in matters of
liability for the nuclear-powered ships.
Additionally, there were several issues considered specific to matters related to
nuclear-powered vessels, and the anticipated international treaty should deal with them:
A very important issue was whether the rules would be common for nuclear-powered
merchant ships and warships with nuclear propulsion, while the latter presented the
majority of nuclear-powered vessels at the time. Furthermore, there was a question
3
Fergusson, E. Liability of nuclear powered vessels: the work toward an international convention: some
problems and principles,
Atomic Energy Law Journal,
1960, at p. 25.
4
Szasz, P. The Convention on the Liability of Operators of Nuclear Ships,
Journal of Maritime Law and
Commerce,
1970, at p. 547.
5
Miller, C
.
Problems of International Legislation regulating the Liability of Operators of Nuclear Ships,
Progress in Nuclear Energy,
1962, at p. 306.
6
Colliard, A
.
La Convention de Bruxelles relative á la responsabilité des exploitants de navires nucléaires,
Annuaire francais de droit international,
1962, at p. 42.