CYIL Vol. 4, 2013

JAKUB HANDRLICA CYIL 4 ȍ2013Ȏ a financial obligation arising from the Vienna system of nuclear third party liability, 13 but also due to the fact that they did not belong to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) at that time and were, consequently, not eligible to join the Paris Convention. 2.2 Nuclear liability conventions of the “second generation” The international nuclear liability regimes established by the Paris and Vienna Conventions retained most of their original features until the late 1980s. Victims in the contracting parties to the Paris Convention would receive benefits available under its provisions if a nuclear incident occurred in the territory of one of the contracting parties to this convention. At the same time, victims in the contracting parties to the Vienna Convention were entitled to benefits under that convention in the event a nuclear incident occurred within one of its contracting parties. 14 However, the Chernobyl accident (1986) triggered public concern about international civil liability and made lawmakers aware of considerable gaps existing in the international legal framework. Several consequences of the independent and separate co-existence of the two major international liability regimes were identified: Firstly, neither convention applied to damage suffered in the territory of a contracting party to the other convention. Furthermore, neither convention applied to nuclear incidents occurring in the territory of a contracting party to the other convention. Moreover, both conventions applied to nuclear incidents occurring and damage suffered on or above the high seas, which might result in their simultaneous application. Consequently, less than six months after the Chernobyl tragedy, experts from both the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the International Atomic Energy Agency concluded that a “joint protocol” uniting the Paris and Vienna Conventions would be the most practical and effective solution in order to deal with the problems outlined above. The result was the adoption of the Joint Protocol relating to the Application of the Vienna and Paris Convention of 1988 (hereinafter only “the Joint Protocol”) . 15 Further, in order to strengthen the liability regime of the Vienna Convention, the Protocol of 1997 to Amend the Vienna Convention of 1963 (hereinafter also “the Protocol of 1997”) 16 was adopted under the auspices of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Seven years later, the Contracting Parties to the Paris Convention 13 Lamm, V . The Unification of Nuclear Liability Law within the EU Member States from the Viewpoint of a Party to the Vienna Convention,in Pelzer, N. (ed.) Europäisches Atomhaftungsrechtim Umbruch , Nomos Verlag, Baden Baden, 2010, pp. 213 et seq. 14 Busekist, O . A Bridge Between Two Conventions on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage: the Joint Protocol Relating to the Application of the Vienna and the Paris Convention, in OECD/IAEA (eds.) International Nuclear Law in the Post – Chernobyl Period , OECD, Paris, 2006, pp. 129 et seq. 15 The Joint Protocol relating to the Application of the Vienna Convention and Paris Convention of 21 September 1988 entered into force on 27 April 1992. 16 The Protocol to Amend theVienna Convention onCivil Liability for Nuclear Liability of 12 September 1997 entered into force on 3 October, 2003.